Discover
/
Article

Niels Bohr as Fund Raiser

OCT 01, 1985
Bohr’s dealings with the Rockefeller Foundation were decisive in bringing about the successful reorientation of his institute from atomic to nuclear physics in the 1930s.
Finn Aaserud

Nuclear physics came of age as a discipline in the 1930s. In 1932, the “miraculous year” of nuclear physics, physicists discovered two new particles, the neutron and the positron, developed revolutionary particle‐accelerator equipment and split nuclei for the first time by manmade machines. The study of the nucleus soon developed into an independent field, becoming the central area of research in theoretical physics. During the mid‐1930s, Niels Bohr’s Institute for Theoretical Physics at the University of Copenhagen experienced a successful transition to the new field of investigation, consolidating its position as an international Mecca for theoretical physics research. In early 1936 Bohr proposed his revolutionary compound‐nucleus model, and in late 1938 the Bohr institute’s cyclotron, a major device for provoking nuclear reactions, was the first such apparatus to go into operation in Europe. Since then, Bohr’s institute has been an international leader in theoretical nuclear physics research.

This article is only available in PDF format

References

  1. 1. D. J. Kevles, Phys. Teach. 10, 175 (1972); https://doi.org/PHTEAH
    C. Weiner, PHYSICS TODAY, May 1972, p. 40;
    R. H. Stuewer, Nuclear Physics in Retrospect: Proceedings of a Symposium on the 1930s, Univ. Minnesota P., Minneapolis (1979).

  2. 2. The original meaning of the term referred to the conceptual approach to physics at Bohr’s institute; see W. Heisenberg, The Physical Principles of the Quantum Theory, Dover, New York (1930), preface.
    The more recent meaning of the term can be obtained from numerous physicists’ reminiscences, but see in particular L. Rosenfeld, Niels Bohr: An Essay Dedicated to Him on His Sixtieth Birthday 1945, North Holland, Amsterdam (1949);
    V. Weisskopf in Physics in the Twentieth Century: Selected Essays, MIT, Cambridge, (1972) p. 52.
    The concept is discussed at some length in P. Robertson, The Early Years: The Niels Bohr Institute 1921–1930, Akademisk Forlag, Copenhagen (1979), p. 152.

  3. 3. As a notable exception, P. Robertson, The Early Years: The Niels Bohr Institute 1921–1930, Akademisk Forlag, Copenhagen (1979) stresses the administrative aspect of Bohr’s work at the institute.

  4. 4. G. W. Gray, Education on an International Scale: A History of the International Education Board, 1923–38, Harcourt Brace, New York, (1941);
    R. E. Kohler, Minerva 16, 480 (1978).https://doi.org/MINEFY

  5. 5. “The problem of the refugee scholars,” p. 3, typewritten, undated report, circa 1940, in the Rockefeller Foundation Archive (RFA), Pocantico Hills, New York, record group 1.1, series 717, box 1, folder 6 (1.1,717,1,6).

  6. 6. Report of the Emergency Committee in Aid of Displaced German Scholars, 1 January 1934, p. 11, pamphlet contained in RFA (1.1,717,1,1).

  7. 7. A. D. Beyerchen, Scientists Under Hitler: Politics and the Physics Community in the Third Reich, Yale U.P., New Haven (1977), p. 15.

  8. 8. For an apt description of Hevesy’s personality, see H. Levi, George de Hevesy, Adam Hilger, Bristol (1985).

  9. 9. Letter from Bohr to Fowler, 12 December 1934, Bohr scientific correspondence, microfilm 19, section 2, deposited in the Niels Bohr Archive, Copenhagen, the AIP Niels Bohr Library, New York, and elsewhere.

  10. 10. R. E. Kohler, in The Sciences in the American Context: New Perspectives, N. Reingold, ed., Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C. (1979), p. 249;
    P. Abir‐Am, Social Studies of Science 12, 341 (1982).

  11. 11. “Report of the Committee of Appraisal and Plan,” p. 58, in RFA (3,900,22,170).

  12. 12. W. Weaver, Scene of Change: A Lifetime in American Science, Scribners, New York (1970), p. 65.

  13. 13. Warren Weaver diary, 10 July 1933, RFA, record group 12.

  14. 14. Wilbur Tisdale diary, 29 October 1934, RFA, record group 12.

  15. 15. Letter from Bohr to Tisdale, 22 February 1935, RFA (1.1,713,4,47) (transcribed version), and Bohr general correspondence, special file, microfilm 6, section 1 (BGC‐S 6,1), Niels Bohr Archive, Copenhagen (Bohr’s carbon copy).

  16. 16. Letter from Tisdale to Weaver, 27 February 1935, RFA (1.1,713,4,47).

  17. 17. Letter from the Nordic Insulin Foundation to Bohr, 22 March 1934, BGC‐S 3,4.

More about the authors

Finn Aaserud, American Institute of Physics, Center for History of Physics, New York.

Related content
/
Article
Figuring out how to communicate with the public can be overwhelming. Here’s some advice for getting started.
/
Article
Amid growing investment in planetary-scale climate intervention strategies that alter sunlight reflection, global communities deserve inclusive and accountable oversight of research.
/
Article
Although motivated by the fundamental exploration of the weirdness of the quantum world, the prizewinning experiments have led to a promising branch of quantum computing technology.
/
Article
As conventional lithium-ion battery technology approaches its theoretical limits, researchers are studying alternative architectures with solid electrolytes.
This Content Appeared In
pt-cover_1985_10.jpeg

Volume 38, Number 10

Get PT in your inbox

pt_newsletter_card_blue.png
PT The Week in Physics

A collection of PT's content from the previous week delivered every Monday.

pt_newsletter_card_darkblue.png
PT New Issue Alert

Be notified about the new issue with links to highlights and the full TOC.

pt_newsletter_card_pink.png
PT Webinars & White Papers

The latest webinars, white papers and other informational resources.

By signing up you agree to allow AIP to send you email newsletters. You further agree to our privacy policy and terms of service.