Verisoph
public archive
Add event
4052 accepted outside stories 9706 accepted uncited 4880 accepted cited 361 candidates 18 duplicate groups
all acceptedcandidaterejected cited uncited in stories outside stories duplicates contestedunprovendebunkedlegendary colonialism (3)culture (1216)detention (1)diplomacy (1135)economy (2635)environment (169)exploration (143)kenya (3)pillar (30)politics (6162)propaganda (2)religion (1513)science (650)society (3148)technology (762)violence (1)war (2244) manage topics

5613 event(s), page 57 of 57, 0 uncited and 13 outside stories on this page

0 selected status importance
  1. 2034 of what concessions the various powers are prepared to make as their contributio rejected ai_extracted 1 cit. no story of what concessions the various powers are prepared to make as their contribution to an adequate control arrangement, [will it] be possible for any one of the partners to assure themselves of the sincerity of the intentions of the others.”2034 The untitled memorandum Bohr prepared for Franklin Roosevelt in Washington in 1944 went to Felix Frankfurter for review on July 5 along with a cover letter apologizing for its inadequacies. ●●
  2. 2035 and 50 percent by 2050, positioning it, claims van Beurden, to “meet the go rejected ai_extracted 1 cit. no story 2035 and 50 percent by 2050, positioning it, claims van Beurden, to “meet the goals of the Paris Agreement on Climate Change ●●
  3. 2035 Bohr worried through the hot night and composed another apology the next day: “I rejected ai_extracted 1 cit. no story Bohr worried through the hot night and composed another apology the next day: “I have had serious anxieties,” he confided, “that [the memorandum] may not correspond to your expectations and perhaps not at all be suited for the purpose.”2035 Frankfurter had the good sense to recognize the document’s merit—it is still the only comprehensive and realistic charter for a postnuclear world—and about a week later told Bohr he had handed it to the President. ●●
  4. 2051 rejected ai_extracted 1 cit. no story .2051 He resented even more that he was removed [by lack of administrative contact] from Oppenheimer.” The theoretical complexity of the Super challenged Teller as the fission bomb had not; it also offered a line of work along which he might lead. ●●
  5. 2055 You have to have a gun emplacement, and a gun, and a sand butt, which is nothing rejected ai_extracted 1 cit. no story You have to have a gun emplacement, and a gun, and a sand butt, which is nothing but a huge box full of sand that you fire projectiles into so that you can find the pieces afterwards, and because there might be somebody else out there.”2055 The site they chose was Anchor Ranch, a former working ranch three miles southwest of the mesa that the Army had bought as part of the reservation; they fired the first shot on September 17, 1943. ●●
  6. 2069 “Both because of the theoretical problems still to be solved and because of the rejected ai_extracted 1 cit. no story “Both because of the theoretical problems still to be solved and because of the possibility that the Super would have to be made with tritium,” reports the Los Alamos technical history, “it appeared that the development would require much longer than originally anticipated.” Work could continue—the Super was too portentous a weapon to ignore—but only to the extent that it “did not interfere with the main program.”2069 Von Neumann soon drafted Ulam to help work out the hydrodynamics of implosion. ●●
  7. 2070 “The hydrodynamical problem was simply stated,” Ulam comments, “but very difficu rejected ai_extracted 1 cit. no story “The hydrodynamical problem was simply stated,” Ulam comments, “but very difficult to calculate—not only in detail, but even in order of magnitude.”2070 He remembers in particular a long discussion early in 1944 when he questioned “all the ingenious shortcuts and theoretical simplifications which von Neumann and other . ●●
  8. 2081 At the present time the method to which an over-riding priority must be assigned rejected ai_extracted 1 cit. no story At the present time the method to which an over-riding priority must be assigned is the method of implosion.”2081 That necessity was painful, as the Los Alamos technical history makes clear: “The implosion was the only real hope, and from current evidence not a very good one.”2082 Oppenheimer agonized over the problem to the point that he considered resigning his directorship. ●●
  9. 2083 “The Laboratory had at this time strong reserves of techniques, of trained manpo rejected ai_extracted 1 cit. no story “The Laboratory had at this time strong reserves of techniques, of trained manpower, and of morale,” says the technical history.2083 “It was decided to attack the problems of the implosion with every means available, ‘to throw the book at it.’ ” Going over the prospects with Bacher and Kistiakowsky, Oppenheimer decided to carve two new divisions out of Parsons’ Ordnance Division: G (for Gadget) under Bacher to master the physics of implosion and X (for eXplosives) under Kistiakowsky to perfect explosive lenses. ●●
  10. 2084 He was extremely suspicious of me rejected ai_extracted 1 cit. no story He was extremely suspicious of me.2084 Parsons had his hands full in any case designing the uranium gun, Little Boy, and arranging its eventual use. ●●
  11. 2093 I remember that I met the man at the old Warner Theater here in Washington, up i rejected ai_extracted 1 cit. no story I remember that I met the man at the old Warner Theater here in Washington, up in the balcony—real cloak and dagger stuff.”2093 Abelson briefed the BuOrd officer about the plant he was building. ●●
  12. 2094 This vital information the BuOrd man carried to Los Alamos and passed along to E rejected ai_extracted 1 cit. no story This vital information the BuOrd man carried to Los Alamos and passed along to Edward Teller.2094 Teller in turn briefed Oppenheimer. ●●
  13. 2095 suddenly told me that we had [made] a terrible scientific blunder,” Groves testi rejected ai_extracted 1 cit. no story suddenly told me that we had [made] a terrible scientific blunder,” Groves testified after the war.2095 “I think he was right. ●●