Skip to main content

Trinity - Frank Close ****

Physicist Frank Close has a kind of dual writing life - which is ideal given he's here writing about the dual life of a German nuclear physicist who was also a Russian spy. Many of Close's books give plenty of detail on a specific aspect of physics - my favourite is his compact title Neutrino, a great introduction to this fascinating particle. However, Close also has a penchant for spy history. He's already given us the story of Bruno Pontecorvo in Half Life, and now we get a biography of the Klaus Fuchs.

A communist from his youth, Fuchs fled Nazi Germany for the UK, where the outbreak of war saw him first treated as a suspicious enemy alien, but his expertise in the suddenly desperately important field of nuclear physics saw him brought into the fold, working on theory for nuclear reactors and atomic bombs, both in the UK and in the US, where he made important contributions to the Manhattan Project. Shockingly, when it all came out in 1950, it was also discovered that most of the time between 1941 and 1949, he was passing nuclear secrets to Russia - and without doubt made it possible for Russia to catch up with the West in its development of nuclear weapons.

This isn't a heavy science book - Close only gives high level details of the physics involved - but instead it features a very detailed history of Fuchs' spying activity and the (frankly bumbling) process by which he was eventually caught. Rather than paint Fuchs in black and white as an evil betrayer of his adopted country, Close gives us a balanced picture that helps understand why Fuchs felt it was important to balance up what could have been total American nuclear world dominance after the Second World War and why his conscience seemed to force him to confess, when he had proved excellent at covering his tracks and dissembling in the past.

I have slightly mixed feelings about the level of detail Close goes into. We certainly get to experience the reality of spying in all its sometimes clever, sometimes pathetic detail - not to mention the goings on at the Harwell nuclear research establishment in the UK, which seemed to have enough bed-swapping to make it an ideal topic for a modern drama series. It is also really interesting to see how MI5 developed from practically nothing to a professional(ish) intelligence agency. However, it did almost feel that Close was too, erm, close to his subject, giving us so much detailed description of conversations, journeys and so forth that at times it could become a touch tedious if not being considered as an academic title.

Another small moan - perhaps because the focus isn't the science, there were a number of scientific typos. For example, chemical formulae are written incorrectly with the number of atoms shown as a straight number rather than a subscript, we're told 100 degrees Fahrenheit is the same temperature as 100 degrees Celsius, and uranium hexafluoride is described as a 'mixture of uranium and fluorine' rather than a compound. All trivial editing errors, but suggesting that the focus was elsewhere.

There is no doubt that Close - who personally knew some of those involved - is ideally placed to tell this story, and does so with immense care. This was a crucial period in the development of the modern world, and whether or not Fuchs deserves the cover epithet of being 'the most dangerous spy in history', it's a story that is still important today. 
Hardback 

Kindle 
Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you
Review by Brian Clegg

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Roger Highfield - Stephen Hawking: genius at work interview

Roger Highfield OBE is the Science Director of the Science Museum Group. Roger has visiting professorships at the Department of Chemistry, UCL, and at the Dunn School, University of Oxford, is a Fellow of the Academy of Medical Sciences, and a member of the Medical Research Council and Longitude Committee. He has written or co-authored ten popular science books, including two bestsellers. His latest title is Stephen Hawking: genius at work . Why science? There are three answers to this question, depending on context: Apollo; Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, along with the world’s worst nuclear accident at Chernobyl; and, finally, Nullius in verba . Growing up I enjoyed the sciencey side of TV programmes like Thunderbirds and The Avengers but became completely besotted when, in short trousers, I gazed up at the moon knowing that two astronauts had paid it a visit. As the Apollo programme unfolded, I became utterly obsessed. Today, more than half a century later, the moon landings are

Space Oddities - Harry Cliff *****

In this delightfully readable book, Harry Cliff takes us into the anomalies that are starting to make areas of physics seems to be nearing a paradigm shift, just as occurred in the past with relativity and quantum theory. We start with, we are introduced to some past anomalies linked to changes in viewpoint, such as the precession of Mercury (explained by general relativity, though originally blamed on an undiscovered planet near the Sun), and then move on to a few examples of apparent discoveries being wrong: the BICEP2 evidence for inflation (where the result was caused by dust, not the polarisation being studied),  the disappearance of an interesting blip in LHC results, and an apparent mistake in the manipulation of numbers that resulted in alleged discovery of dark matter particles. These are used to explain how statistics plays a part, and the significance of sigmas . We go on to explore a range of anomalies in particle physics and cosmology that may indicate either a breakdown i

Splinters of Infinity - Mark Wolverton ****

Many of us who read popular science regularly will be aware of the 'great debate' between American astronomers Harlow Shapley and Heber Curtis in 1920 over whether the universe was a single galaxy or many. Less familiar is the clash in the 1930s between American Nobel Prize winners Robert Millikan and Arthur Compton over the nature of cosmic rays. This not a book about the nature of cosmic rays as we now understand them, but rather explores this confrontation between heavyweight scientists. Millikan was the first in the fray, and often wrongly named in the press as discoverer of cosmic rays. He believed that this high energy radiation from above was made up of photons that ionised atoms in the atmosphere. One of the reasons he was determined that they should be photons was that this fitted with his thesis that the universe was in a constant state of creation: these photons, he thought, were produced in the birth of new atoms. This view seems to have been primarily driven by re