What do you think?
Rate this book
La guerra di Heisenberg. La storia segreta dell'atomica nazista
Nulla mancava alla Germania di Hitler per costruire una bomba atomica, e sarebbe stata la prima della storia. C’era il sostegno delle alte gerarchie naziste, c’era l’appoggio della casta militare, c’erano i laboratori e gli impianti industriali meglio attrezzati d’Europa e c’era infine un gruppo di scienziati guidati dal genio della meccanica quantistica Werner Heisenberg, premio Nobel per la Fisica nel 1932 che, pur ricevendo proposte dalle migliori università e dai più prestigiosi istituti di ricerca del mondo, si rifiutò di lasciare il suo Paese.
Perché allora non ci fu un’atomica nazista? Una risposta a questa domanda è ben Heisenberg e gli altri scienziati tedeschi sbagliarono i calcoli e sostennero che il piano avrebbe richiesto troppi anni di studi, un’enorme quantità di uranio e sarebbe rimasto comunque di difficile realizzazione. Di fronte a questo scenario, i gerarchi nazisti avrebbero optato per altre strategie.
Ma Heisenberg era stato sincero? Aveva davvero creduto che la bomba rappresentasse una possibilità tecnicamente irrealizzabile? Sono le domande che ispirano il lavoro investigativo di Thomas Powers, premio Pulitzer che ha dedicato anni di ricerca a seguire le pur labili tracce lasciate dallo scienziato tedesco, recuperando relazioni ufficiali e documenti segreti, ricostruendo conversazioni private con colleghi e amici, cercando di ricomporre la personalità, le idee morali e politiche di questo gigante della Fisica del Novecento, e smontando una fittissima trama di false accuse, fraintendimenti, reticenze.
Come e forse più ancora che nel caso di Oppenheimer, la storia segreta dell’atomica nazista s’interseca con le vicende personali di alcuni tra i più grandi scienziati del secolo oltre allo stesso Heisenberg e a Robert Oppenheimer, Niels Bohr, Victor Weisskopf, Enrico Fermi, Max Born e molti altri.
A rendere la vicenda ancor più intricata è la presenza, accanto agli scienziati e a volte a loro insaputa, dei servizi segreti, che svolsero opera di disinformazione, attivarono reti di spionaggio, progettarono missioni omicide. Questo libro, molto discusso fin dalla sua prima edizione americana nel 1993, propone una ricostruzione profonda e convincente degli avvenimenti legati al progetto dell’atomica nazista e del ruolo di assoluto protagonista giocatovi da Heisenberg stesso. Con lo stile incalzante dello scrittore di spy stories e con il talento del giornalista investigativo, Thomas Powers affronta uno dei capitoli più oscuri e misteriosi del Novecento.
Perché allora non ci fu un’atomica nazista? Una risposta a questa domanda è ben Heisenberg e gli altri scienziati tedeschi sbagliarono i calcoli e sostennero che il piano avrebbe richiesto troppi anni di studi, un’enorme quantità di uranio e sarebbe rimasto comunque di difficile realizzazione. Di fronte a questo scenario, i gerarchi nazisti avrebbero optato per altre strategie.
Ma Heisenberg era stato sincero? Aveva davvero creduto che la bomba rappresentasse una possibilità tecnicamente irrealizzabile? Sono le domande che ispirano il lavoro investigativo di Thomas Powers, premio Pulitzer che ha dedicato anni di ricerca a seguire le pur labili tracce lasciate dallo scienziato tedesco, recuperando relazioni ufficiali e documenti segreti, ricostruendo conversazioni private con colleghi e amici, cercando di ricomporre la personalità, le idee morali e politiche di questo gigante della Fisica del Novecento, e smontando una fittissima trama di false accuse, fraintendimenti, reticenze.
Come e forse più ancora che nel caso di Oppenheimer, la storia segreta dell’atomica nazista s’interseca con le vicende personali di alcuni tra i più grandi scienziati del secolo oltre allo stesso Heisenberg e a Robert Oppenheimer, Niels Bohr, Victor Weisskopf, Enrico Fermi, Max Born e molti altri.
A rendere la vicenda ancor più intricata è la presenza, accanto agli scienziati e a volte a loro insaputa, dei servizi segreti, che svolsero opera di disinformazione, attivarono reti di spionaggio, progettarono missioni omicide. Questo libro, molto discusso fin dalla sua prima edizione americana nel 1993, propone una ricostruzione profonda e convincente degli avvenimenti legati al progetto dell’atomica nazista e del ruolo di assoluto protagonista giocatovi da Heisenberg stesso. Con lo stile incalzante dello scrittore di spy stories e con il talento del giornalista investigativo, Thomas Powers affronta uno dei capitoli più oscuri e misteriosi del Novecento.
1008 pages, Kindle Edition
First published April 1, 1993
26 people are currently reading
705 people want to read
About the author
Thomas Powers
26 books24 followersThomas Powers is an American author and intelligence expert.
He was awarded the Pulitzer Prize for National Reporting in 1971 together with Lucinda Franks for his articles on Weathermen member Diana Oughton (1942-1970). He was also the recipient of the Olive Branch award in 1984 for a cover story on the Cold War that appeared in The Atlantic, a 2007 Berlin Prize, and for his 2010 book on Crazy Horse the Los Angeles Times Book Prize for History.
He was awarded the Pulitzer Prize for National Reporting in 1971 together with Lucinda Franks for his articles on Weathermen member Diana Oughton (1942-1970). He was also the recipient of the Olive Branch award in 1984 for a cover story on the Cold War that appeared in The Atlantic, a 2007 Berlin Prize, and for his 2010 book on Crazy Horse the Los Angeles Times Book Prize for History.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 32 reviews
August 14, 2023
A really "fair" book, especially when it comes to Heisenbergs role in the Uranverein.
Powers research sorts fact from myth, while being informing and thrilling.
I would also recommend it if the movie "Oppenheimer" wasn't enough for you.
Powers research sorts fact from myth, while being informing and thrilling.
I would also recommend it if the movie "Oppenheimer" wasn't enough for you.
August 2, 2025
"American Prometheus" (the book that the Oppenheimer movie is derived from) makes it clear that a large part of the motivation for the Manhattan Project - and the reason it was carried out with such haste - was the fear that the Germans were also working on a bomb and might be ahead. Therefore, a complete picture of the Manhattan project requires one to also understand in detail what was happening at the same time in Germany. This book provides a picture of the other side.
It was believed that any German bomb project would be headed by Oppenheimer's former schoolmate Heisenberg (they had studied together at Göttingen in Germany), and this was indeed the case. Heisenberg had known and been friends with many of the scientists on the Manhattan project - many of whom were refugees from Hitler's Germany. Several had urged Heisenberg - when he was travelling around the USA delivering a series of lectures just prior to the war - to take a position at a US university and not go back to Germany. Heisenberg refused - even though he was under no illusions that war was imminent - he wanted to remain in Germany for its duration. Heisenberg tried to explain his reasons for doing so to his former friends and colleagues, he didn't really manage to express himself, and it wasn't long before he came to be viewed first with suspicion, and then as an outright enemy. Plans to kidnap or assassinate Heisenberg were eventually dreamt up (by his former friends), and indeed an assassin was eventually dispatched to kill Heisenberg during a lecture he was giving in neutral Switzerland during the war.
In my mind, this book is much more interesting than the Oppenheimer one. If the argument that the book puts forward is true, then Heisenberg was also fighting to prevent Germany from getting an atomic bomb first, but his fight was much more dangerous and much more interesting than Oppenheimer's. Heisenberg appears to have realized something rather obvious, something his colleagues in America somehow missed - namely, that he could do the most damage to the German bomb project not by running away, denouncing Hitler, and being one more scientistic helping to build the allied bomb, but rather by going back to Germany, appearing to be a loyal subject, and heading the bomb project there. He needed to appear to be working as hard as he could on it - while at the same time quietly sabotaging the project. Heisenberg had to walk such a fine line while doing this in order to not get caught - unable to tell a soul the truth - that even today historians can't say with 100% certainty that this is what he was doing.
There are a few things which can be said with certainty. Heisenberg met with his former Postdoctoral supervisor Niels Bohr in Copenhagen in September 1941, asking him to pass on a message to the Allies. The message was, in effect, that the Allies should "play up" the difficulties of making an atomic bomb when asked by their governments, so that said governments would be discouraged and no bombs would be built. One might argue that Heisenberg had realized that if only all scientists everywhere would agree to do this, then atomic bombs would at least be delayed, if not stopped. Unfortunately, Bohr didn't see things this way. He believed that Heisenberg simply wanted to prevent the *allies* from making a bomb, so that Germany would have a monopoly on the A-bomb when they built theirs. He became angry and instead delivered a warning to the allies that the Germans were working on a bomb, and so they better hurry and build theirs first.
However, there is now plenty of evidence that Heisenberg was being honest with Bohr, although uncovering it is difficult because of all the deception that Heisenberg used to ensure that he wasn't caught. To find it, Heisenberg's official statements are not enough - private letters with friends, recollections and in some cases recordings of conversations, are needed. In particular, after Germany was defeated, all the scientists working on the German bomb project were shipped to England and put under house arrest for six months, with their every word secretly recorded. The transcripts of those six months provide many clues.
How do you kill an Atomic bomb project? Well, you have to convince the authorities that it is unfeasible, and the biggest determinant of feasibility is the critical mass of enriched Uranium needed to build a bomb. We now know the correct answer to be a few kilograms - but at the time, it was an open question. Heisenberg did a plausible but incorrect calculation that the critical mass would be several tons - plausible enough to convince his colleagues - and then reported that number to Hitler's government. That alone effectively killed the project. There were a few other "scientific blunders" or "deliberately incorrect but plausible computations" - depending on what you believe - but this was the most important.
So, was this calculation of critical mass - off by two orders of magnitude - a genuine mistake on Heisenberg's part, or a deliberate attempt to discourage Hitler from trying to build a bomb, while maintaining plausible deniability? Heisenberg's critics - chief among them Samuel Goudsmit - insist it was the former. However, a detailed analysis of the evidence available suggests the latter. It's worth looking at the (secretly recorded) reaction of the German Scientists under house arrest when they learnt of the bombing of Hiroshima.
Heisenberg: ...I still don't believe a word about the bomb but I may be wrong. I consider it perfectly possible that they have about ten tons of enriched Uranium, but not that they have ten tons of pure U-235.
Hahn: But if they have, say, 30kg of pure 235, couldn't they make a bomb with that?
Heisenberg: But it still wouldn't go off, as the mean free path length is still too big.
Hahn: But tell me why you used to tell me that one needed 50kg of 235 to do anything. Now you say one needs two tons.
Looking at the dialogue above, it seems to me that the following is true: (1) Heisenberg initially calculated, correctly, that one would need a few kg of enriched Uranium to make a bomb. Realizing that this would encourage Hitler to make a bomb, he then cooked up fake calculations giving the answer of several tons. However, before changing his official answer, he shared the "a few kg" answer with a few friends. (2) Heisenberg is not being truthful in the exchange above. Even in the company of friends, he feels the need to hide his actions (which if discovered, would amount to treason), but Hahn (who is innocently unaware of this) is making this difficult by bringing up Heisenberg's earlier numbers.
This is of course impossible to prove, but there are a few other pieces of circumstantial evidence. There was a warning that a man named Houtermans managed to get to the allies in 1941 saying that Germany was building a bomb, but that "Heisenberg does everything he can to delay the work as much as possible". There is the astonishing speed - a matter of hours - with which Heisenberg had produced corrected versions of his "Scientific Blunders" after the bombing of Hiroshima was announced. Within a week he was delivering a lecture to the other scientists present on atomic bomb physics, in which his previous mistakes were removed. The speed with which he did this is so astonishing - even for a man of Heisenberg's genius - that it suggests he knew the truth all along. As the book says "The contradictions in these facts are too stark for any explanation but one: Heisenberg kept much of what he knew to himself".
If it is true that Heisenberg covertly sabotaged the German Bomb project - thereby depriving Hitler of an atomic bomb - an obvious question is why he never admitted to this publicly. If he were believed, it would have made him a hero (in the eyes many). It's impossible to know the answer to this, just as it's impossible to know for sure whether Heisenberg really *did* sabotage the German bomb project. One possibility is that he assumed he *would not* be believed. This doesn't seem very far fetched - in the years immediately after the war, Heisenberg made many attempts to explain his actions and to heal friendships with his old colleagues in America - but he eventually gave up. His former friends never understood him - not even Niels Bohr, with whom he had had an extremely close friendship in the years prior to the war - and his friendships never really healed. He remained something of a pariah in the physics community until the time of his death. If he could not even make his friends understand, why expect that he could make the world at large understand? A second possibility is that - even in post-Hitler Germany - publicly admitted to committing treason during the war, depriving Germany of the one weapon with which it might have avoided defeat, would at best make him unpopular with a certain segment of the German population (he remained in Germany after the war) and at worst put his life in danger. Or, he may ultimately have thought that taking credit for his actions was not ultimately that important - what mattered was keeping an A-bomb out of Hitler's hands.
Heisenberg took the truth with him to the grave, and so now we will never know for sure.
It was believed that any German bomb project would be headed by Oppenheimer's former schoolmate Heisenberg (they had studied together at Göttingen in Germany), and this was indeed the case. Heisenberg had known and been friends with many of the scientists on the Manhattan project - many of whom were refugees from Hitler's Germany. Several had urged Heisenberg - when he was travelling around the USA delivering a series of lectures just prior to the war - to take a position at a US university and not go back to Germany. Heisenberg refused - even though he was under no illusions that war was imminent - he wanted to remain in Germany for its duration. Heisenberg tried to explain his reasons for doing so to his former friends and colleagues, he didn't really manage to express himself, and it wasn't long before he came to be viewed first with suspicion, and then as an outright enemy. Plans to kidnap or assassinate Heisenberg were eventually dreamt up (by his former friends), and indeed an assassin was eventually dispatched to kill Heisenberg during a lecture he was giving in neutral Switzerland during the war.
In my mind, this book is much more interesting than the Oppenheimer one. If the argument that the book puts forward is true, then Heisenberg was also fighting to prevent Germany from getting an atomic bomb first, but his fight was much more dangerous and much more interesting than Oppenheimer's. Heisenberg appears to have realized something rather obvious, something his colleagues in America somehow missed - namely, that he could do the most damage to the German bomb project not by running away, denouncing Hitler, and being one more scientistic helping to build the allied bomb, but rather by going back to Germany, appearing to be a loyal subject, and heading the bomb project there. He needed to appear to be working as hard as he could on it - while at the same time quietly sabotaging the project. Heisenberg had to walk such a fine line while doing this in order to not get caught - unable to tell a soul the truth - that even today historians can't say with 100% certainty that this is what he was doing.
There are a few things which can be said with certainty. Heisenberg met with his former Postdoctoral supervisor Niels Bohr in Copenhagen in September 1941, asking him to pass on a message to the Allies. The message was, in effect, that the Allies should "play up" the difficulties of making an atomic bomb when asked by their governments, so that said governments would be discouraged and no bombs would be built. One might argue that Heisenberg had realized that if only all scientists everywhere would agree to do this, then atomic bombs would at least be delayed, if not stopped. Unfortunately, Bohr didn't see things this way. He believed that Heisenberg simply wanted to prevent the *allies* from making a bomb, so that Germany would have a monopoly on the A-bomb when they built theirs. He became angry and instead delivered a warning to the allies that the Germans were working on a bomb, and so they better hurry and build theirs first.
However, there is now plenty of evidence that Heisenberg was being honest with Bohr, although uncovering it is difficult because of all the deception that Heisenberg used to ensure that he wasn't caught. To find it, Heisenberg's official statements are not enough - private letters with friends, recollections and in some cases recordings of conversations, are needed. In particular, after Germany was defeated, all the scientists working on the German bomb project were shipped to England and put under house arrest for six months, with their every word secretly recorded. The transcripts of those six months provide many clues.
How do you kill an Atomic bomb project? Well, you have to convince the authorities that it is unfeasible, and the biggest determinant of feasibility is the critical mass of enriched Uranium needed to build a bomb. We now know the correct answer to be a few kilograms - but at the time, it was an open question. Heisenberg did a plausible but incorrect calculation that the critical mass would be several tons - plausible enough to convince his colleagues - and then reported that number to Hitler's government. That alone effectively killed the project. There were a few other "scientific blunders" or "deliberately incorrect but plausible computations" - depending on what you believe - but this was the most important.
So, was this calculation of critical mass - off by two orders of magnitude - a genuine mistake on Heisenberg's part, or a deliberate attempt to discourage Hitler from trying to build a bomb, while maintaining plausible deniability? Heisenberg's critics - chief among them Samuel Goudsmit - insist it was the former. However, a detailed analysis of the evidence available suggests the latter. It's worth looking at the (secretly recorded) reaction of the German Scientists under house arrest when they learnt of the bombing of Hiroshima.
Heisenberg: ...I still don't believe a word about the bomb but I may be wrong. I consider it perfectly possible that they have about ten tons of enriched Uranium, but not that they have ten tons of pure U-235.
Hahn: But if they have, say, 30kg of pure 235, couldn't they make a bomb with that?
Heisenberg: But it still wouldn't go off, as the mean free path length is still too big.
Hahn: But tell me why you used to tell me that one needed 50kg of 235 to do anything. Now you say one needs two tons.
Looking at the dialogue above, it seems to me that the following is true: (1) Heisenberg initially calculated, correctly, that one would need a few kg of enriched Uranium to make a bomb. Realizing that this would encourage Hitler to make a bomb, he then cooked up fake calculations giving the answer of several tons. However, before changing his official answer, he shared the "a few kg" answer with a few friends. (2) Heisenberg is not being truthful in the exchange above. Even in the company of friends, he feels the need to hide his actions (which if discovered, would amount to treason), but Hahn (who is innocently unaware of this) is making this difficult by bringing up Heisenberg's earlier numbers.
This is of course impossible to prove, but there are a few other pieces of circumstantial evidence. There was a warning that a man named Houtermans managed to get to the allies in 1941 saying that Germany was building a bomb, but that "Heisenberg does everything he can to delay the work as much as possible". There is the astonishing speed - a matter of hours - with which Heisenberg had produced corrected versions of his "Scientific Blunders" after the bombing of Hiroshima was announced. Within a week he was delivering a lecture to the other scientists present on atomic bomb physics, in which his previous mistakes were removed. The speed with which he did this is so astonishing - even for a man of Heisenberg's genius - that it suggests he knew the truth all along. As the book says "The contradictions in these facts are too stark for any explanation but one: Heisenberg kept much of what he knew to himself".
If it is true that Heisenberg covertly sabotaged the German Bomb project - thereby depriving Hitler of an atomic bomb - an obvious question is why he never admitted to this publicly. If he were believed, it would have made him a hero (in the eyes many). It's impossible to know the answer to this, just as it's impossible to know for sure whether Heisenberg really *did* sabotage the German bomb project. One possibility is that he assumed he *would not* be believed. This doesn't seem very far fetched - in the years immediately after the war, Heisenberg made many attempts to explain his actions and to heal friendships with his old colleagues in America - but he eventually gave up. His former friends never understood him - not even Niels Bohr, with whom he had had an extremely close friendship in the years prior to the war - and his friendships never really healed. He remained something of a pariah in the physics community until the time of his death. If he could not even make his friends understand, why expect that he could make the world at large understand? A second possibility is that - even in post-Hitler Germany - publicly admitted to committing treason during the war, depriving Germany of the one weapon with which it might have avoided defeat, would at best make him unpopular with a certain segment of the German population (he remained in Germany after the war) and at worst put his life in danger. Or, he may ultimately have thought that taking credit for his actions was not ultimately that important - what mattered was keeping an A-bomb out of Hitler's hands.
Heisenberg took the truth with him to the grave, and so now we will never know for sure.
November 14, 2014
mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmeh.
This man definitely wrote a book about physics between about 1930 and 1949. I definitely learned the name of every single physicist in the world during that time. Who they knew, what they worked on, etc...
While Heisenberg is referenced throughout, it's mostly to say things like, "Heisenberg was still sticking to his story that the Germans weren't working on the bomb. But gosh, if the way he said it, it sure seemed like there was more to the story." Spoiler Alert: There isn't any more to the story. (Unless you like speculative parsing of casual remarks.)
I guess I appreciate learning about every single physicist in the world during World War II, but having come to this book wanting to read about WH, I was disappointed. I don't think I'd have read a book called "30 Billion Sequential Factual Statements About the Global Physics Community Leading Up To and For the Duration of WW2"
This man definitely wrote a book about physics between about 1930 and 1949. I definitely learned the name of every single physicist in the world during that time. Who they knew, what they worked on, etc...
While Heisenberg is referenced throughout, it's mostly to say things like, "Heisenberg was still sticking to his story that the Germans weren't working on the bomb. But gosh, if the way he said it, it sure seemed like there was more to the story." Spoiler Alert: There isn't any more to the story. (Unless you like speculative parsing of casual remarks.)
I guess I appreciate learning about every single physicist in the world during World War II, but having come to this book wanting to read about WH, I was disappointed. I don't think I'd have read a book called "30 Billion Sequential Factual Statements About the Global Physics Community Leading Up To and For the Duration of WW2"
January 20, 2016
This is a book I read some time back, but was reminded of recently. I'm not much of a fan of conspiracy theories and in the end, this book is essentially just that. It raises the premise (and provides some evidence) that the reason the Nazi's never developed the bomb is because Werner very carefully made sure they did not! That's quite a revision in the historical view of Heisenberg and if true, moves him from Nazi collaborator to unsung hero in short order. I found it interesting and a very engaging stab at "how, with such a lead, did Germany fail to get to a 'device' first?" I'm not 100% convinced by the way, but if I were on a jury, Powers has raised "reasonable doubt" for me.
March 4, 2022
A fascinating read that explores all facets of the race to create the atomic bomb during WWII from German, British, and American perspectives. Meticulously researched and put into a readable format. Fascinating story lines throughout, particularly the efforts by the Americans to determine how far Germany had advanced in atom bomb research, especially those involving former major league catcher Morris Berg.
January 19, 2020
Not bad, but... For me the intriguing question is whether Heisenberg actively worked against developing a German atomic bomb. I don't suppose I'm giving too much away by saying that nobody now living knows.
January 3, 2023
Just me I’m sure...but too many names and oh so dry
September 23, 2025
A puzzle of the first order. One of the great mysteries of the Second World War is whether Werner Heisenberg, German Noble Prize Winner in Physics and employee of the Nazis, ever learned the secret of how to manufacture an atomic bomb, and if so did he deliberately sabotage his own nuclear project to prevent Hitler from winning the war. The play, and film, COPENHAGEN, relating a wartime meeting between Heisenberg and Niels Bohr, a fellow Noble recipient, in occupied Denmark, comes to a definite "maybe" on this question. The majority of historians, including Richard Rhodes (THE MAKING OF THE ATOMIC BOMB) are positive Heisenberg did not posses the skills to build the earth-destroying device. Thomas Powers, biographer extraordinaire (THE MAN WHO KEPT THE SECRETS: RICHARD HELMS AND THE CIA) voices a dissenting opinion. Heisenberg, utilizing the nuclear fission theory of Lord Rutherford of England before the war, and the successful experiment in fission in a laboratory by two German scientists after Hitler became Chancellor, did not need to make much of a mental leap to apply uranium to build an atomic device, one capable of obliterating London or Moscow. Heisenberg CHOSE not to take the next step, which would have made him the German Enrico Fermi, knowing full-well the world could not stand a German victory. Agreed, this scientific genius was capable of turning theory into serving what Churchill called "the lights of perverted science". But, he never was a political person, showed no qualms about working for the Nazis, and, assuming he knew the secret of the a-bomb, could he have persuade Hitler and Speer to invest in a German "Manhattan Project", draining resources and key personnel away from the war front? These decisions were political and military, not scientific. Powers has presented a controversial case for the defense, Heisenberg "not guilty" of wanting to build a bomb, without convincing evidence.
June 24, 2024
Absolutely fascinating. Thank you James Mustich’s 1000 books to read list.
Ww2, Hitler had all the resources to make an atomic bomb; uranium from Czechoslovakia, heavy water from occupied Norway, and one of the preeminent physicists in the world, Werner Heisenberg. And yet Germany never built an atomic bomb, never even came close during WWII. What we know for sure is that Heisenberg (who never joined the Nazi Party) told the Nazis that building a bomb would take years and require far more resources than they had.
This book makes a good case for the argument that Heisenberg deliberately steered the Nazis away from bomb research by deliberately exaggerating the difficulties. Heisenberg had been encouraged by many to emigrate out of Germany before war broke out. Although Heisenberg was distressed by Hitler, he deeply loved his country Germany. Heisenberg fully expected Hitler to be defeated, and he wanted to stay in Germany to help with rebuilding after the war. And it seems we all owe him a great debt for keeping the bomb out of Hitler’s hands.
Ww2, Hitler had all the resources to make an atomic bomb; uranium from Czechoslovakia, heavy water from occupied Norway, and one of the preeminent physicists in the world, Werner Heisenberg. And yet Germany never built an atomic bomb, never even came close during WWII. What we know for sure is that Heisenberg (who never joined the Nazi Party) told the Nazis that building a bomb would take years and require far more resources than they had.
This book makes a good case for the argument that Heisenberg deliberately steered the Nazis away from bomb research by deliberately exaggerating the difficulties. Heisenberg had been encouraged by many to emigrate out of Germany before war broke out. Although Heisenberg was distressed by Hitler, he deeply loved his country Germany. Heisenberg fully expected Hitler to be defeated, and he wanted to stay in Germany to help with rebuilding after the war. And it seems we all owe him a great debt for keeping the bomb out of Hitler’s hands.
July 21, 2020
While very physics heavy at times, Powers did an amazing job both laying out the timeline of the science behind the atomic bomb, and ties in his argument for why he believes Heisenberg morally stalled the development of the German atomic bomb.
January 19, 2021
A fine history.
May 25, 2024
First 150 pages are great. After that it gets repetitive and dry.
February 23, 2025
Thomas Powers’ Heisenberg’s War: The Secret History of the German Bomb offers an intricate and deeply researched account of Werner Heisenberg’s role in Nazi Germany’s nuclear weapons program. The book explores the moral and scientific dilemmas faced by German physicists under Hitler’s regime and examines whether Heisenberg and his colleagues actively sought to build an atomic bomb or deliberately slowed the project’s progress.
Powers’ central thesis suggests that Heisenberg, while ostensibly working on nuclear research, may have subtly resisted the weaponization of atomic energy. The author draws upon extensive archival materials, including the Farm Hall transcripts—secret recordings of German physicists detained by the Allies after the war—to argue that Heisenberg and his team either failed in their mission or strategically avoided creating a functioning bomb. The book delves into Heisenberg’s ambiguous wartime behavior, his post-war justifications, and the broader implications of scientific responsibility under authoritarian regimes.
One of the book’s strengths lies in its comprehensive use of historical evidence. Powers effectively contextualizes Heisenberg’s scientific achievements within the broader political and military landscape, offering a nuanced portrait of a physicist navigating ethical and professional challenges. The narrative is compelling, balancing technical details with historical analysis, making it accessible to both scholars and general readers interested in World War II and the history of science.
However, the book has not been without controversy. Some historians and physicists, including experts on the German nuclear project, have criticized Powers’ interpretation as overly speculative. Critics argue that the lack of definitive evidence supporting Heisenberg’s alleged resistance casts doubt on Powers’ thesis. Others contend that the German failure to produce a bomb was more a result of technical and organizational shortcomings rather than deliberate sabotage.
Despite these criticisms, Heisenberg’s War remains a valuable contribution to the historiography of World War II science. It raises important questions about the role of scientists in wartime, the ethics of nuclear research, and the complex interplay between scientific ambition and political ideology. Powers’ work stimulates ongoing debates about Heisenberg’s motivations and the extent of German nuclear capabilities during the war, making it an essential read for those interested in the history of science and technology.
Powers’ Heisenberg’s War is an engaging and thought-provoking examination of the German nuclear program, presenting a controversial yet meticulously researched argument about Heisenberg’s role. While some of its conclusions remain debatable, the book successfully highlights the moral complexities of scientific research under totalitarian rule. For historians of science, World War II scholars, and those interested in the ethical dimensions of scientific discovery, this book offers a compelling, if contested, narrative of one of the 20th century’s most enigmatic physicists.
GPT
Powers’ central thesis suggests that Heisenberg, while ostensibly working on nuclear research, may have subtly resisted the weaponization of atomic energy. The author draws upon extensive archival materials, including the Farm Hall transcripts—secret recordings of German physicists detained by the Allies after the war—to argue that Heisenberg and his team either failed in their mission or strategically avoided creating a functioning bomb. The book delves into Heisenberg’s ambiguous wartime behavior, his post-war justifications, and the broader implications of scientific responsibility under authoritarian regimes.
One of the book’s strengths lies in its comprehensive use of historical evidence. Powers effectively contextualizes Heisenberg’s scientific achievements within the broader political and military landscape, offering a nuanced portrait of a physicist navigating ethical and professional challenges. The narrative is compelling, balancing technical details with historical analysis, making it accessible to both scholars and general readers interested in World War II and the history of science.
However, the book has not been without controversy. Some historians and physicists, including experts on the German nuclear project, have criticized Powers’ interpretation as overly speculative. Critics argue that the lack of definitive evidence supporting Heisenberg’s alleged resistance casts doubt on Powers’ thesis. Others contend that the German failure to produce a bomb was more a result of technical and organizational shortcomings rather than deliberate sabotage.
Despite these criticisms, Heisenberg’s War remains a valuable contribution to the historiography of World War II science. It raises important questions about the role of scientists in wartime, the ethics of nuclear research, and the complex interplay between scientific ambition and political ideology. Powers’ work stimulates ongoing debates about Heisenberg’s motivations and the extent of German nuclear capabilities during the war, making it an essential read for those interested in the history of science and technology.
Powers’ Heisenberg’s War is an engaging and thought-provoking examination of the German nuclear program, presenting a controversial yet meticulously researched argument about Heisenberg’s role. While some of its conclusions remain debatable, the book successfully highlights the moral complexities of scientific research under totalitarian rule. For historians of science, World War II scholars, and those interested in the ethical dimensions of scientific discovery, this book offers a compelling, if contested, narrative of one of the 20th century’s most enigmatic physicists.
GPT
September 3, 2020
Quite slow to start as physicists and papers and conferences get shuffled around before the war, some of the characters being important, but others could have perhaps been skipped or briefly mentioned. Still, it offers a decent overview of some rare aspects of the conflict without going too deeply into any science, namely the clandestine activities of the Manhattan project and its intel on German physics during the war. The final days of Germany are also covered well, with interesting threads about the important scientists and those seeking them out. A somewhat weak and transparent argument is made at the very end, though it can mostly be ignored without impeding the book as a whole.
January 15, 2024
Good book on an interesting subject. However, the Germans had zero chance to "Win the race for the bomb", no matter what Heisenberg did. Germany simply didn't have the resources or the time. Miltarily the Germans had lost the war in September 1944. It took the unbombed USA with the greatest scientists in the world, till July 45 to develop a usable A-bomb.
Even if the Germans had started a "Berlin Project" in June 1941 it would've been too late. Which makes the obsession about the "German Bomb" by Groves and Oppenhiemer so mysterious. Both wanted to Kill Hiesenberg and other German scientists and actually had the OSS set up a team to kill Hiesenberg. Groves/Oppie thought assassination was justified even if there was 1/10 chance of a German bomb. It was originally suggested to Groves/Oppie by two Jewish scientists working on the Manhattan project. Groves tried to get the Army to do it, but Marshall said "Let Groves do his own dirty work".
The book devotes a large part of the book to this assassination attempt. The amorality is striking. You get the impression that it was less about stopping the German Bomb than a desire to punish Heisenberg for being a German. But Oppie/Groves also wanted to poison Germans with radioactive waste. It wasn't done because they figured at least 500,000 Germans had to die to affect the war, and that wasn't possible.
Even if the Germans had started a "Berlin Project" in June 1941 it would've been too late. Which makes the obsession about the "German Bomb" by Groves and Oppenhiemer so mysterious. Both wanted to Kill Hiesenberg and other German scientists and actually had the OSS set up a team to kill Hiesenberg. Groves/Oppie thought assassination was justified even if there was 1/10 chance of a German bomb. It was originally suggested to Groves/Oppie by two Jewish scientists working on the Manhattan project. Groves tried to get the Army to do it, but Marshall said "Let Groves do his own dirty work".
The book devotes a large part of the book to this assassination attempt. The amorality is striking. You get the impression that it was less about stopping the German Bomb than a desire to punish Heisenberg for being a German. But Oppie/Groves also wanted to poison Germans with radioactive waste. It wasn't done because they figured at least 500,000 Germans had to die to affect the war, and that wasn't possible.
August 8, 2013
This is a worthwhile read, although not on par with Richard Rhodes' masterpiece, The Making of the Atomic Bomb. It does, however, provide an account of the German efforts (or lack thereof) to build a bomb. The author takes a clear position with regard to Werner Heisenberg and his role. I must admit that I was not convinced by the arguments in the book that Heisenberg, the famous father of the Uncertainty Principle, was actively sabotaging the German effort. I think the jury will remain forever out on that theory. Nonetheless, the Nazi research that was done and the Allied efforts to stop it are an important chapter in the history of WWII.
December 27, 2016
This account of the German and American bomb programs is certainly thorough, but not overly well written. It reminds me of Undaunted Courage and other Ambrose Pierce novels, lots of information given in a disjointed fashion and with less regard for readability than one would hope. On the plus side, it was interesting to hear what happened to German scientists after the advent of quantum mechanics because most other novels covering that topic drop Heisenberg after the introduce his uncertainty principle.
June 30, 2015
Apparently, the dominant post-WWII view was that Heisenberg and others failed to build an atomic bomb for Hitler because they were not particularly competent and were working under an oppressive, totalitarian regime. This book describes an alternative in which Heisenberg subtly but actively undermined Nazi Germany's bomb-making interests. This is an extremely well-documented history and is generally well-written, if a bit choppy at times moving back in forth in history. I didn't find the explanation as to why Heisenberg didn't just come out and say what happened very convincing.
August 14, 2012
Werner Heisenberg was that rare commodity: a patriot to his country and a man of principle at the same time. Post WWII, he was derided as an incompetent scientist and Nazi collaborator, but recent evidence reveals he managed to hold back the Nazi atomic weapons program. A fantastic bit of history is in this book including OSS espionage, the Manhattan project, and the German effort. Compellingly written and hard to put down.
July 13, 2016
A well researched account of how Germany's own scientist failed to produce atomic weapons. This author takes into account how Heisenberg may have purposely failed in atomic bomb research due to his devotion to his country and his belief that Hitler's Nazi regime would collapse and lose the war. This book offers a behind the scenes look at the men and women who were part of the atomic weapons war effort on both sides of WW II.
April 3, 2009
I read this book early in college. As always, it is amusing to read about crazy physicists and their amusing, idiot-savant-ish exploits. I particularly liked the part about how Heisenberg almost failed his Phd exam when someone asked him how a battery worked. Oh, those theoretical physicists! Always so charmingly obtuse about practical matters!
July 29, 2016
Great book, a bit exhaustive, but thorough. The part with Bohr ran on a bit, that last meeting with Werner. Cool stuff about Moe Berg, baseball, all those languages.
November 16, 2008
He presents good evidence that Werner Heisenberg stayed in Germany and prevented the Atomic bomb from faster development, although he was one scientist who probably could have pushed Germany’s development faster, or at least in keeping with the US.
July 20, 2010
A long history book, that delves too much into minute details for the sake of completeness, which I suppose is good for a research paper or something, but its pretty tedious. More about the American perception of the German bomb project than the project itself, which was annoying.
January 5, 2011
Read this while I was working at Abbott and got about 3/4 through it before someone took it off the shelf! It was a very good read overall and I'm going to have to find the book again so I can finish it.
August 24, 2016
Excellent piece of revisionist history. A cogent argument made for the premise that Heisenberg purposely sidetracked the Nazi bomb because of moral considerations. I read this a number of years ago. It is a fascinating account.
Want to read
June 30, 2008the author is a friend of my mother's and Heisenberg my father studied with for over a year when i was three--so really want to read this one
March 23, 2012
Excellent narrative of atomic research in Germany during WWII, alongside great anecdotes and deep questions of morality.
January 23, 2017
Germany and Nuclear science
Displaying 1 - 30 of 32 reviews