Neil deGrasse Tyson and Brian Greene Discuss Oppenheimer

What do two physicists think about the movie Oppenheimer? Neil deGrasse Tyson sits down with theoretical physicist Brian Greene to discuss the science in Christopher Nolan’s film Oppenheimer, based on Robert J. Oppenheimer’s work on the Manhattan Project. How did the movie do in capturing such a major moment in quantum physics?
They break down parts of the film: did Nolan get anything wrong? We explore the concerns that the atomic bomb would ignite the atmosphere and the mechanism that would make that possible. Would Brian have said yes to working on the Manhattan Project if he had been alive at the time? Was achieving nuclear fission good for science? Plus, get Neil and Brian's Favorite moments from the film and their main takeaways from the era.
Get the NEW StarTalk book, 'To Infinity and Beyond: A Journey of Cosmic Discovery' on Amazon: amzn.to/3PL0NFn
Support us on Patreon: / startalkradio
FOLLOW or SUBSCRIBE to StarTalk:
Twitter: / startalkradio
Facebook: / startalk
Instagram: / startalk
About StarTalk:
Science meets pop culture on StarTalk! Astrophysicist & Hayden Planetarium director Neil deGrasse Tyson, his comic co-hosts, guest celebrities & scientists discuss astronomy, physics, and everything else about life in the universe. Keep Looking Up!
#StarTalk #neildegrassetyson
00:00 - Introduction: Oppenheimer
3:37 - Moments that Gave Brian Pause
10:10 - Would The Bomb Ignite the Atmosphere?
21:05 - Accomplishing Unfathomable Science
25:45 - The Golden Age of Quantum Physics
29:41 - The Role of Communism & McCarthyism

[@StarTalk]

FYI: At 6:37, I imply that the German Physicist Werner Heisenberg was Jewish. That’s clearly false. He worked closely with the Nazis in their attempt to harness atomic energy for military purposes, as other parts of the conversation indicate. I thank the several attentive viewers who caught this for bringing it to my attention. - Neil deGrasse Tyson

[@macanoodough]

Feynman is named by the guy who gets his attention to hand him the eye protection. So you're wrong about that, too. G's Louise, this show is going down hill fast...

[@parasbhargava6047]

you dont imply you say that he is jewish.

[@robcrissinger776]

The scientists that came to Einstein came there after getting put off time and time again by America's Hero Charles Lindbergh, fortunately they heard him doing an America First groups antisemitic raving Jew hate speech. They hunted down Albert and asked him to notify the president. And that is the rest of the story

[@donteto]

well, the SS did called him "Weißer Jude"@@parasbhargava6047, maybe it all came from this sentence

[@tonyareed5083]

@@parasbhargava6047 🤣

[@oaguilera81]

It’s always a great episode when Brian Greene is on the show. The two are just phenomenal.

[@nedo68]

I got to know Brian for the first time through The Elegant Universe (1999), simply fantastic.

[@michaeltrillium]

Brian is phenomenal. Tyson is sometimes ok, but Tyson on DEI is 🤮

[@helloxonsfan]

*This was a very captivating & fascinating discussion...* *BTW... I'd actually pay good money to see the likes of Tyson & Greene talk about the likes of Barbie! (lol)* 🤣

[@StarMan_1367]

Are you here for content consumption? 😅

[@laura-ann.0726]

@@nedo68- I read that series a few years ago. Brian Greene can explain string theory and quantum mechanics in a way that it's possible for non-physicists to grasp at least the basic concepts without having to know the mathematics.

[@WilliamRoeder-bw7ed]

My favorite scene in Oppenheimer was when he was in graduate school in Europe appreciating a Picasso portrait. Cubism was a revolutionary way of viewing art just as his field (pun intended) of quantum mechanics was a revolutionary way of viewing physics. Also, cubism is representing reality as independent chunks, just as quantum mechanics does. Beautiful!

[@seauryakumar]

Can you hear the music?

[@Snap_Crackle_Pop_Grock]

It was pretentious, Picasso sucks hard.

[@sunflower-oo1ff]

I know, it was an awesome scene !👌

[@seauryakumar]

@@Snap_Crackle_Pop_Grock what was your favourite movie of the year?

[@nameless-user]

According to the source material, the man had Picasso paintings in his own home. Apparently, he came from some serious money.

[@irasingh8884]

I saw the movie on second day it was released and couldn’t get it out of my head for two weeks. I was so moved and awed by it …the direction ,the acting of Chillian Murphy ,the screenplay, the background music..everything.

[@svsguru2000]

They focused on that probability of igniting the atmosphere and destroying the world, to bring it back at the end of the movie, when oppenheimer said "I think we did."

[@nicolaslabra2225]

its a way from the film of saying, there was indeed a chain reaction, not one of physics but a political one.

[@K.C-2049]

@@nicolaslabra2225 the moment it was brought up, I knew that analogy was gonna be the end stinger. I was like "oop there it is." didn't stop it from being very impactful though.

[@TP_Gillz]

Ya, it IS inevitable someday in the future, hopefully far away, that we use these weapons again. Perhaps when we are fighting over the last of the precious resources we've used up. Every generation is going to think the next one will solve these issues. Until time is up. Perhaps this happens to EVERY intelligent society in the universe that ever comes to be.... We are inevitably destined to destroy ourselves before ever getting to be an interstellar species.

[@ricomajestic]

The movie should've focused more on that instead of whether or not Oppenheimer's security clearance would be revoked which was boring!

[@Rick_Iz]

🏆

[@MuffFlux]

On Brian Greene's point, the film is an art piece, not a documentary... It wasn't to literally demonstrate his mental processes. It was an artistic license to send a message and set the tone for the rest of the film... It was a film device, not a tangible, scientific, empirical representation of his brain/mental imagery... People went to the cinemas to see a Nolan film, not a direct 1:1 representation.

[@erinm9445]

It's telling though, that an actual physicist didn't find that to be an artistic representation of a scientist's thinking that resonated. It seemed to me to try to make Oppenheimer's view of of physics seem almost mystical, which is silly.

[@GnomonsLand]

Given his point of view, it's kinda funny that he chose that spot to film because the wall behind him resembles some of those artists' renderings of mental processes from the movie lol

[@sunflower-oo1ff]

Cillian Murphy was more than awesome, he was the movie !!!👍💚💚💚💚💚

[@Sif3r]

It was an artistic representation to show how theorists/physicists etc. see and perceive the world differently. Which of course they do.

[@erinm9445]

@@Sif3r Yeah, except the guy complaining about it in the video....is an actual physicist! A really famous one! He doesn't think that captures anything about how he sees the world.

[@zaidyousef965]

I like Neil DeGrasse. I would like him even better if he stops interrupting Brian Greene every five seconds.

[@Chaotician69]

I think this is one of my favorite podcasts to date. Giants of science discussing other giants of science. In a way ... paying homage to their predecessors. I'm also thrilled to know they got the movie "Oppenheimer," right. The seal of approval is given by two huge names in the current world of science.

[@Chaotician69]

I've always been interested in the history of physics. This discussion provided so much information on the history of what transpired during that time period. You guys should collaborate for writing a book on the history of physics from your collective perspectives and the important contributions of each scientist and how they've improved quality of living. Or how their discoveries have led to technological advancements.

[@richardcarbery7035]

Neither of them are giants of science. Neil has been great relating science and Brian has done the same but in pure theory (String Theory.) The people they are talking about are "giants" of science.

[@Chaotician69]

@richardcarbery7035 that's your perspective, and it's totally fine. My perspective is that they are both great educators of science and are both known worldwide. Neil is the face and the voice of science. He helps bring out the curiosity of humans and literally brings them back to the world of science. In my mind, he is a GIANT of science. Only a handful of educators can take that credit

[@yubantwo2086]

​@Chaotician69 I agree with you wholeheartedly. It's interesting to note that our culture generally thinks more highly of talent after the person is dead than during their lifetimes. Let us not forget that Oppenheimer, after all he accomplished, was stripped of his significance during his lifetime. It is right to give contemporary geniuses their flowers while they yet live.

[@IIxViip3rzv3]

I'd genuinely enjoy watching more Neil deGrasse Tyson movie reviews, scientific or otherwise 😄

[@girl.anachronism5639]

MISCARRIAGES IN GAZA ARE UP 300%, WOMEN ARE GETTING C SECTIONS WITH NO ANESTHESIA, CHILDREN ARE BEING MELTED FROM THE INSIDES, PEOPLE DYING IN THE STREETS, SHOT AT WHEN THEY GO TO AIDE TRUCKS, SPEAK UP FOR PALESTINE, BOYCOTT, PROTEST!!

[@jeremiahlethoba7445]

They come once in a while, movies like Oppenheimer

[@eddiemarohl5789]

Him reviewing the expanse would be awesome

[@jedaaa]

Starship Troopers!!!

[@TyrellWellickEcorp]

The guy is a major tool. Nice to know there’s still ignorant people like you who can’t see through his blatant buffoonery

[@keithmiller2714]

Thank you for letting me be a fly on the wall of this conversation.

[@colinjava8447]

You don't need to be an insect on a wall, you can just watch the video as a human.

[@jpkatz1435]

Thanks, seriously, for the remimder.​@@colinjava8447

[@andrewparker318]

Holy crap please do more of these!! I love hearing Neil deGrasse Tyson analyzing more than just the science of a movie!!

[@bryanholland6987]

When Neil says - "War is something you have to see from up close to know we should never do it." I've said this to my friends before, War might be harder to achieve with video gamers. Because, with all the wargames I played, if I had to buy a coffin (and be rich enough to do so) for every time that I died, there wouldn't be enough coffins in my state to cover the event. People might be less willing to engage in war or promote war, if they understood how quickly and unexpected death comes to the participants.

[@WeinerDefender]

One of the best ways to promote military enrollment is call of duty (at least 10 years ago).

[@bryanholland6987]

@@WeinerDefender They must have been told that they can respawn.

[@honkymonkey9568]

Point well taken, but I would think it would make one desensitized with repetition and they never actually die.

[@WeinerDefender]

@@bryanholland6987 Yeah its dumb, just the truth.

[@Ryan-on5on]

Like Drs. Tyson and Greene, I find "Oppenheimer" did an overall commendable job of balancing partly fictionalized movie drama with the real historical and scientific elements of the story. More than most major Hollywood productions, I felt at times welcomingly challenged, and not the least spoon-fed or patronized, by Nolan's portrayal of history and scientific discovery here. Though there are issues of historical perspective, narrative, and simplification intractable with films geared to a mass audience, Nolan and his creative team must be applauded for their effort of trying to portray this incredibly complex and multidimensional story with as much sensitivity to history as the genre allows, a commendable thing to be sure in the age of the fatuous blockbuster epic.

[@brandonsmith6052]

Brian Greene and Neil are two of my greatest idols!

[@cesiba1]

They would hate that.

[@brandonsmith6052]

Oh :(

[@Cazza1206]

​@brandonsmith6052 take no notice, they would very much appreciate your interest in what they have to say, especially Neil 😂

[@moonshoes11]

It may just be the phrasing, but these gentlemen are smart enough to get it and appreciate it. Peace.

[@ShonMardani]

There is something called Delayed Neutron which makes it impossible for chain reaction. As they showed in the movie there was no Radioactive materials or any protection for it. I think it is about time for scientists to man up and admit the atomic bomb, einstein and others are FAKE.

[@stratiogesdux]

Enrico Fermi probably could have done Oppenheimer's job. "Fermi led the team at the University of Chicago that designed and built Chicago Pile-1, which went critical on 2 December 1942..." from Wikipedia. So, besides his brilliance, he had organizational skills.

[@chuckvalentine]

I think we should remember it's not Chris Nolan's job to educate a generation. He just made a movie, and its a good one!

[@mikefoster6018]

When I worked in military comms, I knew Oppenheimer's great nephew (?) Andy Oppenheimer very well. He looked and dressed SO much like J Robert and made his lifelong career around detailed editorial/publishing about nuclear and other WMD threads. A quirky chap, he led a synth band and all its songs were about missiles, New Mexico etc. A nice, shy guy. I lost touch, but would enjoy a beer with him again.

[@tglass0000]

This is an exceptional conversation!

[@katiekins17]

My grandfather was asked to work/intern at the Chicago site. He had gone to school in Illinois but was more of a fusion man than fission, he decided to enlist instead. Later he worked with Niels Bohr in Denmark. I think he would have enjoyed the film and my mom agrees.

[@av1421]

amazing! Thx for sharing!

[@callen8000]

Oppenheimer and the detonation team were not "one or two miles" away. They were in a blockhouse called "South 10,000" located 10,000 yards from the tower or 5.7 miles away (a distance that sound travels in about 28 seconds). No one was closer to the tower. Base Camp, where General Groves observed the test, was 10 miles from the tower. Compania Hill where Teller and Feinman observed the test (Feinman sitting in a vehicle) was 20 miles from the tower. The sound and shock wave delays at the three locations were depicted with reasonable accuracy in the movie, but, technically, the shock wave always arrives slightly ahead of the sound.

[@overnight_doughnut_fryer]

That was a great moment in the film because the science mirrored the mythology. The blast - is when Prometheus gave fire to mankind and the sound wave is when the gods looked down and, seeing the fire, screamed in fury. The film is a masterpiece.

[@gli5580]

stop making stuff up

[@RichardFeinman-yf7lx]

Not clear. Heisenberg wasn’t Jewish. Was the speaker mis-informed? He was attacked as a “white Jew” for teaching relativity (“Jewish physics”) but was exonerated by Himmler in a personal letter (their mothers knew each other(!))

[@krelldog1977]

I noticed that as well, at one or two miles that small bunker would be damaged plus irradiated.

[@callen8000]

Well, you could try reading something about the subject, like Richard Rhodes's book, The Making of the Atomic Bomb, and then decide how much I'm "making up." @@gli5580

[@DavJumps]

Best StarTalk conversation in years. More of these, please!

[@lorpsandorps3729]

The film was about Oppenheimer. We get his perspective on it. I think it was important to address how removed the creators were, and how abrupt it was that this creation was now out of their hands.

[@victorparaf97]

I love the fact that we never actually got to see the damage up close because it's if it's through oppenheimer's perspective. Then you're just going to have his perspective where he doesn't really know exactly but has an idea of what happened and then you get a hint at it when he's daydreaming. I think that's what makes it great.

[@maryvasilakakos7387]

Absolutely. Nolan made the right cinematic language choice. It would have been much less impactful if he had shown it. ✅✅❣️

[@victorparaf97]

@@maryvasilakakos7387 Agree💯

[@maryvasilakakos7387]

@@victorparaf97 I hope they use Oppenheimer to train filmmakers from now on...cinematic impact is often best when things are implied rather than shown explicitly. Except that lots of viewers are not trained to pick up cinematic language. I'm gobsmacked so many people have called it a boring film. What did they watch? It's one of the most mesmerising films I've ever, and I'm a dyed in the wool Kurosawa and Kubrick fan 😁❣️

[@JohnnyNiteTrain]

Oppenheimer was so damn good. I saw it twice in IMAX and a few times since at home. It gets better with each viewing. Every facet of the film, from the cast, Nolan's direction and screenplay, the DP Van Hoytema, Göransson's score, the editing, production design, costumes etc, was all top notch.... Sidenote: you guys were talking about Feynman at the beginning, he is played by actor Jack Quaid, son of Dennis Quaid & Meg Ryan. He's in that show The Boys, on Prime.

[@PaulBolton-jl2qm]

Maybe I missed something? I found it dull and boring. Of course they nailed the period and Downey was great, but it was an hour too long and convoluted. Maybe I knew too much about the story before hand...

[@cesarjom]

These type of science-biopic films like Oppenheimer, when made well (and unfortunately there are not enough of them being made), are really pleasing to those of us who have a strong background in theoretical field like physics, because we can really immerse ourselves into the movie's characters and overall plot and grasp it all at whole different level. So very pleasing to our scientific passion!

[@santhoshs9933]

Even for theoreticians like us, the political second half was not gripping.

[@mauricerivermusic9110]

@@santhoshs9933 For me, who remember the "red scare" when an adolescent, the second half made great sense. It was gripping in the context knowing my parents lived through it.

[@mahtabalan4716]

I loved this! It's so great hearing experts who actually comprehend the scientific parts of that entire event talk about and break down the movie. I loved Oppenheimer. I believe Christopher Nolan is a genuine science enthusiast and a master of his own craft.

[@FalconFXICCY]

My mind blew up halfway through watching Drs Tyson and Greene discuss the movie, and I enjoyed every second of it!

[@paulgenovese2096]

Shoutout to Brian mentioning "The Day After Trinity", easily the best doc on the events.

[@markybob_bassplaya1462]

Thanks for the shout out to the engineers.

[@AngryGirl91]

Thank you for this great episode! It's so spectacular to watch these two amazing scientists speak and analyze the movie in detail. I've put away all the things I was doing to enjoy the conversation and not miss anything 👍

[@yubantwo2086]

Thank you so much for this. From my six years as an Administrative Assistant, Grants & Contracts Manager at Columbia University from 1980 - 1986 department of Astronomy/Astrophysics, it was great to hear this discussion confirming what I felt about the movie. I talked to and rode the elevator with Drs Rabi and Wu for a year or two before I discovered their roles in this story. I wish that there could have been a question and answer segment because I would have loved to have asked about why Dr Wu's contribution and importance of separating uranium by gaseous diffusion and her work on isotopes during the Manhattan Project there at Pupin have been buried. Although, I realize that the movie's focus was about what happened at Los Alamos. Again thank you for this insightful & entertaining discussion between two contemporary great scientists.

[@dancooper8551]

Loved this talk! Two of my favorite physicists.

[@skeller61]

Wow, what a great conversation! Thanks for letting us listen in. In one of those ‘duh’ moments for me (at 63) is that the name of uranium and plutonium were from the (at the time) planets. It’s so obvious, yet I never thought about it. Cheers!

[@ray_ray_7112]

I also never thought about it until recent years while I was reading through all the elements on the periodic table. When I saw Mercury, Neptunium, Uranium, and Plutonium, it finally dawned on me.

[@benwu7980]

It's always a bit cool finding out new bits of knowledge, may have thought it was because the Ural areas are a large source of it. Uranus is quite funny / interesting on a number of levels. It was the first to be found via a telescope, and quite nearly was kept as being named George by Herschel ( or Georgian Star ). While the planets got named after Roman gods, their moons got named after Greek ones, except for Uranus, who's moons are named after characters from english literature

[@taradois]

LOVED this conversation and the analysis of the science itself. I especially enjoyed the excitement of seeing certain historical figures - I had NO idea that was Feynman in the car. Now I'm gonna have to watch it a 4th time after hearing all this. Also, for anyone who saw the film in theaters: did you find the score to be super distracting because it was mixed way too loud? Once I watched again at home, the film was wayyyyy more palatable - the score is actually gorgeous and the sound design is extremely well-done.

[@PollardEducation-te7yj]

No lies. I watch this channel faithfully. Neil is the man. But when I saw the name Brian Green AND Oppenheimer on this show, I told everybody at work that I was taking an hour break. I never take breaks. Thank you for this, Neil.

[@pmarkhill519]

Such a delight to hear the two of you discussing this together.

[@karenkeiper1278]

I can’t wait to watch it now, with all of these extra little pieces of information, thanks.

[@buzbuz33-99]

There were a couple of reasons for the discussion in the middle of the movie about burning up the atmosphere that were echoed in the last scene. First, it gave Einstein a chance to make a joke about quantum theorists suddenly wanting certainty. In the last scene we realize that this conflict between Einstein and the quantum theorists is why Einstein was ridiculed, but later given dinner and a medal - as will later happen to Oppenheimer. Second, it allows Oppenheimer, in the second scene to explain that although we did not burn up the atmosphere, we have managed to create a weapon that will "destroy the world". Einstein is so shaken by this observation that he walks right past Strauss. That is also important because, in the prior scene, Strauss had complained that Einstein walking past him was evidence that Oppenheimer had turned Einstein against him in that meeting - but one of aides pointed out that perhaps Oppenheimer and Einstein were discussing something more important than Strauss. At the end of the movie, we know that they were. Nolan used a lot of "call backs". In the last scene, the people in the reception line are not named, but do or say something that they had done previously, e.g. "If you're happy, I'm happy", the Teller handshake (BTW- I wish they had made Teller's eyebrows as bushy as they were in real life.) The music is also great. in the 2 minute scene where Oppenheimer studies quantum mechanics, the violinists have to change tempo 17 times - an amazing performance.

[@user-zb7wu2ue4l]

The movie is also a metaphor for current situation. We are in the middle of a mass extinction of life. Global Warming plays a big factor in it. It is the most imminent threat for all humans around the globe. And it is due to greenhouse gases, to pollution of the atmosphere. The only way to stop that is to consider our planet as a common. That means that politicians of the whole world have to build international agreements around natural ressources overpowering market simplistic logic. If there is no regulation to avoid us to surpass planetary limits, consequences will be desertification, massive migrations and potential global wars between nuclear-weapon states. The last IPCC report was clear. If current trajectory is followed, large regions of the world will be empty of life. Billions of humans are currently living a country that could end up with a deadly heat-moisture level, in few decades. And pursuit of economic growth is the cause of that disaster.

[@buzbuz33-99]

@@user-zb7wu2ue4l I agree. But I like how Nolan used such a light touch to make his point. He only alludes to the debates between Einstein and the supporters of quantum theory - which got pretty nasty. And he did not pontificate about the McCarthy hearings - but instead focused on a personal rivalry between two people. So the movie is an illustration of how personal ambition can blind a person to the truth. But, like a good Shakespearian play, there is plenty of room for interpretation.

[@axr7149]

@@user-zb7wu2ue4l One thing that really strikes me is how some of the Best Picture Oscar nominees this year speak (either directly or indirectly) to the current state of the world. In addition to OPPENHEIMER, there also THE ZONE OF INTEREST (which I heavily recommend BTW, and it has disturbed me for days) as well as KILLERS OF THE FLOWER MOON. These 3 collectively explore the dark side of human nature in their own unique ways while also serving as cautionary tales. Even if you may not agree with it, a lot of people resonated with the messages of BARBIE too, which also explores human nature in it's own unique way (even if heavily commercialized). My personal Top 3 of 2023 are KILLERS OF THE FLOWER MOON, THE ZONE OF INTEREST, and OPPENHEIMER in that order.

[@user-cq8ju6fe4j]

@@user-zb7wu2ue4l So well stated. If only the powers that be could see this. It seems so obvious, doesn't it? What will it take? Is it even possible? I am not optimistic.

[@daryabaghdar4340]

Great discussion between two great scientists. Thanks to both of you for this recording.

[@holstonusa]

It was actually a little darker than it should have been for 5:30 a.m. on July 16 because Congress had placed the entire country on daylight savings time for the duration of the war. It was actually 4:30 a.m. by standard time. Not midnight dark, but it was the blackness of the desert when it is still hours before twilight.

[@larrynixon5979]

I suggest reading Richard Rhodes’ book “ Making of the Atomic Bomb”. Great description of the people who did the research and the breakthroughs that brought us particle physics up through the creation of the bomb. It covers the Manhattan Project in great detail and the horrible effect of the bomb on the people in the two cities that were bombed.

[@freeculture]

Nagasaki was a bit of a poor target, and a tragically ironic at that. It was cloudy and the bomber was trying to aim industrial targets, but it ended falling middle way of two potential ones, right on top of a Christian Church, the first one built in Japan after 250 years of isolation and prohibition of foreign cults... It was a valley surrounded by hills which contained the damage more than Hiroshima open flat. To this day Christianity and religion in general is still generally seen badly by Japanese society, with the extremism of even assassination of Prime Minister Shinzo Abe for "daring" to give a speech at some religious event. Meanwhile South Korea next door is +70% Christian, and the North was too until the communists kicked them out of Pyongyang which used to be called "Jerusalem of the East" from their extreme Christian fervor in the 50ies.

[@kennyw871]

Another good read I can recommend is: The Atomic Bazaar (the rise of the nuclear poor) by William Langewiesche.

[@lordflowerbear6597]

one of the best Startalk episodes ever👍👍

[@brandonbergmusictheory3453]

The fusion discussion (28:00) wasn't a movie set up: Teller was already highly invested in developing this idea during the Manhattan Project itself, and one of Oppenheimer's 'people skills' was figuring out a way to let Teller pursue those ideas in a 'future projects' team without derailing the fission project at hand, to which Teller made crucial contributions. It planted the seed for the later security clearance hearing (which wasn't a trial), as Oppenheimer was no longer in a position to divert Teller.

[@monkerud2108]

there are several methods or isotope separation. the details of most of them are probably classified in most places, but in centrifuges it is a pretty basic problem, you gasify or liquify the stuff, in some molecule and then you basically just make a gradient in isotope concentration based on the weight, you can't separate them very well because of random brownian motion on top of the gradient in density, but in a centrifuge you get a small difference in concentration on the outside radius, rinse and repeat. i think breeding plutonium is generally the way to go for efficiency both at the production side and the warhead side though. there are many potential tricks of process engineering i can think of and ion separation and so on, but those are probably too good to give away anything useful about. but you can in principle ionize any atom, and only then separate the isotopes by uniform magnetic fields and so on, because mass is a thing independent of charge of the ionized atoms, but ca't really elaborate on how to do such a thing efficiently.

[@gowthamprithvi245]

I think I may have answers for a couple of questions. 1. Why did they not show the aftermath of the explosions much -- From what I heard from people in general, they all wished the movie could have shown more of it, but wrong reasons. They want to see that appears to be glamorous instead of actually instilling the fear of it. 2. Why did the movie pay more attention to igniting the atmosphere and ending the world -- I think its to bring emphasis to the final conversation in the movie between Oppenheimer and Einstein where the former says that they may have destroyed the world after all by creating this bomb.

[@aleckg5291]

FINALLY! Love to see current physicists view about what transpired in Oppie’s era. That moment when you both ask if you could have joined if you were there, I love hearing both your opinions on that. Great episode. More of this with other scientists please. Thank you!

[@kurtvonfricken6829]

Only one scientist left the project after Germany surrendered. It’s hard for me to comprehend how these scientists could think it’s OK to drop nukes on Germany but not Japan. It’s also hard for me to comprehend how these scientists don’t seem to realize that the atom bombs saved lives in the long run. Regardless on one’s position on why Japan surrendered if the war continued another year or two millions more would be dead and Japan would have been turned into something like the surface of the Moon. If Project X-ray was used instead of the Manhattan Project things would have been 100x worse for Japan.

[@tonyakahler3575]

So beautiful to participate in a truly cerebral analysis of this Oppenheimer experience. Thank you both.

[@philiphennings5167]

That critique you made about the calculations with ending the world was an artistic point because he was using that moment as an emphasis that, even though scientifically they had no chance of doing it, metaphorically they absolutely destroyed the world because the weapons they made, as the reference of Prometheus, can cause catastrophic damage and it can't be taken back.

[@OldMotherLogo]

Loved this episode. Thanks for pointing out Feynman in the car, I totally missed that. My only complaint about the movie was that I am a Feynman fangirl and I wanted to see him as a character but I did, at least, appreciate the cameos with the bongos.

[@ugowar]

Feynman *was* actually called out by name once, in the scene with the car, when the soldier was passing welding glasses.

[@kurtvonfricken6829]

@@ugowar Feinman: The glass stops the UV Teller: What stops the glass?

[@Alweerdood]

It seems Mr Greene loves to come back, always Great to to see you Guys chat, great respect for each other. Its like 2 superminds together. Keep up the great work,

[@chekote]

I love that the whole episode was relevant to the title. So much better than clickbait titles. ❤

[@Anfield_the_place_to_be]

If i had a teacher like Tyson on school, i would most def had another job now! But can't complain, life turned out good anyway😊

[@spencermann3951]

Life is a journey

[@I-VisiBomb-I]

another job, or a different job? i wouldn't want to have an additional job if i were you...

[@buckhorncortez]

Uh...huh... and you'd probably have won the lottery and be better looking too. I mean, if you're going live in a fantasy world - go all the way.

[@Lockfreak123]

​@@buckhorncortez major false equivalence

[@mm-nyc]

The house where Szilard and Wigner visited Einstein is still there and not far from my house in Cutchogue, NY. I often visit the boulder on the beach where Einstein was photographed in 1939.

[@tyrone4u559]

I found their perspective and critique of Oppenheimer very interesting and insightful. I can now rewatch it with a clearer understanding of the science and brilliant minds involved in the project.

[@kasession]

Interesting conversation. On the subject of the test being run during twilight. I do remember reading in the book "The Girls of Atomic City", that someone did witness the blast. They didn't know what they were seeing, but they described it as the sun coming up and then down.

[@Laserblade]

Thoroughly enjoyable to be a fly on the wall listening to this conversation between these towering intellects. I agree with the perceived lack of destruction shown in the movie, there are very few people alive today that have actually seen an atomic explosion. The world could use context and an understanding of that horror. Dr. Tyson, I am currently devouring your book 'Accessory to War', a wonderful work tying so much history together. Well Done Sir.

[@XeroverDrive]

Feynman has a memoir called "Los Alamos From Below" where he talks some of his many contributions to the operations and processes of involved. He was in some ways subversive in how he went about contributing to the greater good of the project. He demanded that grad students, technicians and maintenance employees were better informed.

[@kichigan1]

My friend and I, two Mathematics enthusiasts, went to see Hidden Figures movie. We liked it, but we wished they showed more of the mathematics on screen. Neil and Greene have a greater expectation about the film than most of the rest of us. Great conversation.

[@Mr.Fox.92]

The location where Oppenheimer was during the blast was 10,000 yards, which was over 5 miles away. Base camp was 10 miles away, (around 19,000 yards away) and another observation post 20 miles away, about 36,000 yards away).

[@keithjohnsonYT]

As big as it was small: the question from the Greene kid, and the answer..that was best. (I still don’t know if “elegant” is the word I would use…) 👍

[@dereks1264]

As an exposition of the horror and impact of a nuclear war, the best film I've ever seen dealing with this is the 1984 BBC (and others) film called "Threads". The film pulled no punches and was unrelentingly graphic and grim, sobering, and shattering.

[@sumuqh]

Truly a great conversation/review of a movie

[@ari-cowan]

This conversation is a breath of fresh air --- thoughtful, intelligent, and heartfelt. An absolute delight and superby done. Many, many thanks.

[@Brownyman]

Hopefully Nolan does a sequel called “Teller” about the Ivy Mike project 👍

[@buckhorncortez]

Oppenheimer was an adaption of the book, "American Prometheus," so the story was already written. Nolan adapted that story for the movie. Oppenheimer is the story of a man, and his interaction with the chain of events leading up to the use of the atomic bombs, and then his fall from grace via Lewis Strauss. There is no equal book to adapt involving Teller and Ivy Mike.

[@smurug85]

I am very grateful to Brian Greene for making me get interested in Physics with the help of his Science Festivals ❤

[@jasminesaldana7796]

so glad i found this channel today! every video is so good i can’t look away from it!!

[@bumpercarjoe6391]

Yes, I found out the guy playing. The bongos was a huge, practical Joker and used to break into safes and sneak out of the premises. I’ve done so much research into each one of these characters and find out the backstory is pretty wild.

[@clehner1]

15:00 Concerning atmospheric ignition: As low as that possibility might be, think of what they did with Castle Bravo not calculating it right (i.e. overlooking the ignition of the rest of the Lithium).

[@israelquito3072]

THIS WAS VERY VERY ENTERTAINIG,WATCHING "BRIAN" AND "NEIL" TALKING ABOUT SOME PIECE OF "THE USA HISTORY" IN A SCIENTIST MANNER,SUPER GREAT!!👍👍👍👍

[@HeartOScience]

Enjoyed the discussion! 👍👍👍😊Great energy between the duo. Thank you Neil and Brian.

[@SKULLKR3W]

Tyson is so right about how the beginning showing Oppenheimers thought process and stuff really establishes his as a visionary thinker and it was so necessary to his character

[@simplyrowen]

I had asked you both to do more movie reviews, and here you are. I’ve never clicked so fast. You’ve made my day. Now I just need a glass of wine to accompany this, and this evening would be perfect.

[@leocmen]

Brian communication skills are off-the-chart. The man is gifted

[@buckhorncortez]

Which chart, so I can see how far off it he is...

[@Johnny2Feathers]

I agree. I remember watching and loving his nova series on pbs.

[@pandaxpres]

Great review from you both

[@jeanineruggeri4573]

Just those 2 scenes of the violent manner was enough for me to never forget when I was a child learning about it.

[@rboraten]

My father was stationed in Japan in the early 1960s. He took us to visit the war museum in Nagasaki. I was 8. I knew THEN that war is NOT the answer. Shocking to see just what happened to all the people around the explosion. I still see it after 60 years.

[@joe-tatothepotatobiden47]

Yes it was devastating but I dont think the guys in this podcast understand the history behind the nukes. The Japanese believed their ruler to be a godlike being. They would send every person to their death if it meant they had a small chance of winning. The US nuked them once and they didn't surrender. They nuked them again and bluffed that they had MORE. Even after that, there was still a big faction that refused to surrender and would go on to have talks of treason to stop the surrender. If the US had nuked some empty place like the guys on this pod said they should have, then history could have played out very differently. Also, invading Japan would have led to even more civilian deaths. Japanese propaganda was so potent back then. The civilians really believed that the allied soldiers were demons. Thats why you had mothers throwing your children and babies off cliffs before jumping themselves. That happened in Okinawa. There wasnt any good solutions to end the war but the nukes were by far the best option

[@Monsux]

I loved how Nolan used black and white sequences to represent Strauss' point of view, while the color sequences to represent Oppenheimer's. It took me a second viewing to realize this. The last scene where Oppenheimer had the talk with Einstein, it was a colored scene... My mind remembered these type of parts wrong, but so much clearer after the second viewing.

[@wolverineiscool7161]

You must be slow. Ofcourse there were color and black and white scenes in the movie. If it took you a second viewing to realize this then you must be duuuuumb

[@katicabogar24]

I may have missed it, would love one of these about For All Mankind 😊

[@christophermitchellsr9492]

i truly do enjoy your videos they are fun informative an like mythbusters make science cool . keep up the great work sir

[@Cazza1206]

I'm pretty sure Feynman is mentioned once 🤔 I agree with Brian, should have shown more of the destruction

[@valentinrafael9201]

Never been this early! Interesting topic for StarTalk.

[@JD-lx2yf]

@8:47 - I agree with Brian here. I think the movie should have shown more. As someone born in the 90s, I have few "connections" as you put it to this story.

[@caiolinnertel8777]

Great “review” of this movie. I too loved the “name” dropping through out. Thank you.

[@christinaandre6286]

I live in New Mexico, 80 miles north of Trinity site. I can say the weather out here is interesting. The clouds for rain are often a blanket that time of year. The rain that postponed the test from 4 am to 530 would likely have kept a cloud cover that kept the sky dark despite the start of sunrise. So it is entirely possible that the sky was as dark as Nolan portrayed in the movie. The brightness of the bomb apparently spread over 280 miles radius. So I would have been able to see the light from the explosion from my house. Kind of crazy to think about.

[@zztops489Y]

I heard a very similar account. It was a stormy morning. There was lightning in the sky, and was perceived as dark. With the storm as backdrop, a huge entity of nature on display, the test lit up the sky, but the most impressive thing that happened, the storm suddenly paled compared to the bomb. A man-made device suddenly took stage over nature. According to this person, that’s when they knew the power of what they had developed.

[@MrRicardowill]

Neil is truly a blessing to be so brilliant in everything he does.

[@BenjySparky]

Neil and Brian, y'all rock! Love the channel and content. Peace

[@rk41gator]

What an interesting and surprisingly wide-ranging discussion which goes way beyond nuclear physics and a movie about The Bomb and the Oscars. Thank you.

[@kevincronk7981]

I watched Oppenheimer in theater the day it was realeased (the only movie I have ever done that for) and had seen a lot of youtube videos about Oppenheimer the man in the weeks before kinda using the movie as an excuse to talk about him, and coming in with a good bit of knowledge about him I was amazed by the attention to detail in the movie and how many little things they put in without it feeling forced. I saw it in IMAX (totally worth it) and of course the scene that was most worth it was when the bomv went off, and coming into the movie I knew there would be a sound delay because sound is slower than light, but I'm not a physicist I don't know the amounts of time off the top of my head, so that suspense was absolutely killing me. I didn't notice the sound track as much as Neil is saying he did, but i love music in veneral so always try to listen to the sound track in movies, and totally agree with Neil about how cool it was when the music suddenly cut out there.

[@marlopauloroxas1479]

Someone did utter Richard Feynman's name in the movie. When someone was giving out glasses before the trinity test, a guy said his name and he declined because he's inside the car and he pointed at the windshield.

[@eNigma011]

I find Feynman's refusal of the glasses hard to believe as he knew the point was not flying glass but intensity of the light as well as the ultra violet radiation. Oppenheimer's proximity to the detonation tells me that even he didn't know for certain the far reaching effects of the explosion. We have come a long way since then in our knowledge of technology and physics but not so far in the knowledge of ourselves.

[@Yodakaycool]

fanastic and thoughtful conversation. ty for letting me listen to it

[@pbennett13]

Great interaction keeping it on the science and scientists .. but I thought Oppenheimer’s meeting with President Truman at the end was a powerful moment and a stark reminder of what was to come

[@philippethibert8825]

I think they put so much more weight on the possibility of igniting the atmosphere, in order to lend more weight to the conversation between Oppenheimer and Einstein (and RDJ's character). I think it allowed general audiences to link the two and it had greater dramatic effect.

[@BrowsePlanet]

I could be crazy but it looked like they did a quick ninja edit when Neil started trying to imagine the process of enriching uranium and Brian was shaking his head like (no Neil bad Neil) lol

[@mrlij6534]

Great Convo with these 2 giants. it just further shows that Nolan is an exceptional researcher, he does this for every film. Research 1st, writing and then action. there is no stopping him becoming the greatest film maker of all time by the time he is done

[@bumpercarjoe6391]

I’ve watched this movie 10x in last week. The movie MAYBE the BEST movie I’ve ever seen. The SCORE was AMAZING. The attacking phenomenal, attention to detail mind boggling, even the WARDROBE was top notch. The movie gets better and better with each viewing. And I find myself CONSTANTLY googling different characters or moments from the movie. So many subtitles such as his affair with Grace Tolken or the Ernest Lawrence inventing of “collider” technology. I mean to think the best movie Christopher Nolan made is a bio pic about a theoretical physicist is pretty amazing. I’d love to see him do a bio pic about Kennedy or Regan. Or perhaps a cold war spy biopic.

[@randyshoquist7726]

In 1980 the BBC did a seven part series, also called Oppenheimer, starring Sam Waterston. It covers the bomb development in more detail, and also covers the security clearance hearing, Less on Strauss's confirmation hearing, however. If you can find it, it's well worth watching.

[@ozmosis0074]

Ive never understood the argument that we should have used the A-bomb on an uninhabited area. If Japan didn't capitulate after the fire bombing of Tokyo and the fall of Okinawa they wouldn't after a "demonstration of atomics".

[@mgariepy42]

I love this discussion of the emphasis on the scientific achievement at the time. As a lay person, I didn’t think about that. Thank you for bringing that up.

[@JumpingJesus4]

It's interesting that both Oppenheimer and Nolan had the rarified skill of attracting star talent to their projects!

[@S4MW45AE]

As a Christopher Nolan fan and astrophysics enthusiast, the best part of the movie is when it ended.

[@sickofthelies1627]

Meaning the ending or that you were happy it was over?