Richard Garwin, a designer of the first hydrogen bomb, dies at 97
A prominent scientist who advised several U.S. presidents, Garwin made contributions in nuclear weapons, physics, and in military technology, among many other areas. He published more than 500 papers and was granted 47 U.S. patents, according to The Garwin Archive maintained by the Federation of American Scientists.
He was just 23 years old when he designed the first working hydrogen bomb, according to a profile written in IEEE Spectrum magazine. It was detonated in a test codenamed Ivy Mike at Enewetak Atoll in November 1952, yielding 10.4 megatons of TNT, the measurement that quantifies the force of nuclear weapons.
Garwin's role had been largely unknown outside of a small circle of physicists, mathematicians, and engineers at Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico, who were involved with the project until 2001, the profile said.
In 2016, former President Obama awarded Garwin the Presidential Medal of Freedom for his scientific work. In the citation, Mr. Obama said Garwin,"made pioneering contributions to U.S. defense and intelligence technologies."
Garwin was honored with the National Medal of Science in 2002 and was awarded the Vannevar Bush Award in 2023, which honors exceptional lifelong leaders in science and technology.
"Richard Garwin is truly remarkable," Dario Gil, Chair of the Board's External Engagement Committee, said in a statement. "His continuing contributions to society, both as a scientific researcher and presidential advisor, help bolster national security and improve international collaboration."
Garwin was born in Cleveland in 1928 and lived in Scarsdale, New York. His wife, Lois, of 70 years, predeceased him. The couple had three children.
Sneak peek: Fatal First Date
Trump teases "good news" on Russia-Ukraine war
Preview: "Sunday Morning: By Design" - A Weekend in New Orleans (May 18)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
a day ago
- The Hill
Trump is returning NASA to its glory days
Back in the day, I had the honor to speak with all 12 men who walked on the Moon — heroes, all. While each was unique in their own way, they were all in agreement with regard to one critically important subject: that a president of the United States could make or break NASA. All agreed that back on Sept. 12, 1962, during his now iconic speech at Rice University on the need for the U.S. to become the 'preeminent spacefaring nation,' President John F. Kennedy made NASA. 'We mean to be a part of it — we mean to lead it,' said the young president. 'For the eyes of the world now look into space, to the Moon and to the planets beyond, and we have vowed that we shall not see it governed by a hostile flag of conquest, but by a banner of freedom and peace. … For space science, like nuclear science and all technology, has no conscience of its own. Whether it will become a force for good or ill depends on man, and only if the United States occupies a position of preeminence can we help decide whether this new ocean will be a sea of peace or a new terrifying theater of war.' More than six decades later, many people in and out of the space business believe that Presidents Barack Obama and Joe Biden combined to break NASA — Biden much more than Obama, in several ways. While Obama simply had no interest in NASA and liked to pretend he was using part of what would have been the space agency's budget for 'education,' Biden — or more likely, as we are learning, his handlers — wanted to use NASA as a test bed for various identity politics and climate-change initiatives. As I have stressed in the past, I don't care what you look like or what you believe. If you are the most qualified for the job, you should get it. Period. To that point, I have long believed that four-time Space Shuttle astronaut Eileen Collins is one of the greatest and most accomplished astronauts in NASA history. A history she added to by not only becoming the first woman to pilot the Space Shuttle, but the first to command a Space Shuttle mission. How? Because she earned it thanks entirely to her exceptional real-world background in the Air Force as not only a multi-aircraft pilot, but as a test pilot. Collins's background not only includes over 6,700 hours in Air Force jets and various aircraft, and over 36 days in space, but real-time problem solving to make the Space Shuttle safer. A number of people — myself included — believe that President Trump should appoint her the first (non-acting) female administrator of NASA. As of now, Secretary of Transportation Sean Duffy is serving as the interim administrator for NASA as well. To be sure, he is already making desperately needed improvements to the once proud agency decimated by Biden's focus on identity politics, the proper use of pronouns and global warming. Duffy serves under Trump, a leader who surely hears the echoes of JFK's warning and believes the U.S. must once again become the 'preeminent spacefaring nation.' Why? Because Kennedy — and now Trump — saw a reality ignored by many. He knew that once humans cut through Earth's atmosphere into the vacuum of space, our flaws, greed, prejudices and military ambitions would not be left behind. Rather, they would be the catalyst to drive some into space. Today, many believe that China — with its entirely military-controlled space program — is the 'preeminent spacefaring nation.' China is targeting all our satellites in low and geosynchronous orbit. Satellites that control the fate of our military, our economy and our nation. The Chinese military is taking dead aim at the Moon and the helium-3 that litters its surface. The helium-3 isotope could provide a potentially limitless supply of safe, clean, green energy. Some experts estimate the Moon's surface holds over 1 million metric tons of helium-3, and that just 25 metric tons could fuel America's energy needs for a year. China was beside itself in glee as Biden and his allies pushed NASA, our military, our defense contractors and our universities ever more 'woke.' But China is smiling no more. Trump is back in the White House and believes NASA should be focused on the national and economic security of America. The military leadership in China now sees a president who intends to double-down on Kennedy's vow to make the U.S. the 'preeminent spacefaring nation.' NASA should never have been made into a plaything for the left. It is a national asset that must once again serve a nation in need. If not, China will eventually control all, from low-earth orbit to the surface of Mars.
New York Post
4 days ago
- New York Post
CBS host warns Trump admin plans for moon base could usher in new age of space colonialism
CBS News host Vladimir Duthiers questioned the Trump administration's plan to establish a base on the moon and drew parallels to Earth's history of colonialism. On 'CBS Mornings Plus' on Wednesday, Duthiers and co-host Adriana Diaz discussed the White House calling for more human space exploration and administration plans to build a nuclear reactor on the moon to precede an eventual U.S. lunar base with astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson. Advertisement Diaz asked if it was 'inevitable that we're going to have to go to the moon and try to colonize the Moon?' Tyson said that the United States is being 'reactive' in a race to the moon with China, and stated, to the laughter of the panel, that he does not want to 'live on the moon.' But Duthiers questioned if colonizing the moon was a good idea. 'We know how the age of colonialism worked on this planet,' the host said. 'Should we be trying to colonize and saying that there's a keep-out zone that no other countries can participate in having?' Advertisement Tyson replied by pointing out that it would be difficult to colonize an area that does not have people. 3 Duthiers questioned if it was a good idea to colonize the moon. CBS 3 United States astronaut Buzz Aldrin salutes the American flag on the surface of the Moon after he and fellow astronaut Neil Armstrong became the first men to land on the Moon during the Apollo 11 space mission July 20, 1969. REUTERS 'Well, the — the real problem with the colonization history in Western civilization is that there were people already there,' Tyson said. Advertisement Duthiers and Diaz agreed, and Tyson added that 'there are no moon beings that were displaced as far as we know.' Tyson later criticized administration plans to decrease funding to NASA. 3 Tyson said that the moon would be difficult to colonize because no one lives there. CBS 'What's not on brand is to cut science programs, not only in NASA, but across the board, and then say, we want to excel in this one spot,' Tyson said. Advertisement 'Well, in the 1960s, science was a major investment profile of the United States,' he continued. 'And by the way, it's not on brand even for Republicans, because Republican administrations since the Second World War have had a higher annual increase, average annual increase, in the science budget than even the Democrats.' 'So Trump's decision to cut science is not on brand for even being a Republican,' Tyson added.
The Hill
03-08-2025
- The Hill
Support for NASA returning to the moon and going to Mars is surging
A recent poll conducted by CBS News provides an encouraging look into public support for the Artemis program to return astronauts to the moon and eventually send humans to Mars. Sixty-seven percent of respondents favor a return to the moon and just 33 percent oppose one. On Mars, sixty-five percent favor sending astronauts to the red planet with 35 percent in opposition. Support for sending astronauts back to the moon tracks favorably among all age groups, with 71 percent of 18 to 29-year-olds in favor. The current favorable view of the Artemis program contrasts with what people thought of the Apollo program to land men on the moon while it was ongoing. As space historian Roger Launius pointed out, most Americans, with the exception of one poll taken in July 1969, took a dim view of going to the moon. 'Consistently throughout the decade, 45-60 percent of Americans believed that the government was spending too much on space, indicative of a lack of commitment to the spaceflight agenda,' Launius wrote. Incidentally, the CBS News poll shows that now Americans believe that the Apollo program was worth the effort, 77 to 23 percent. The findings were consistent with those taken on the 50th and 40th anniversaries of the first moon landing. The fact that support for going back to the moon and on to Mars is uniform across all age groups jumps out. In times past, some have suggested that supporters for sending astronauts beyond low Earth orbit mainly consisted of boomers nostalgic for the glories of the Apollo program. If that was ever the case, it isn't any longer. Laura Seward Forczyk, a space career consultant, video blogger and author of ' Rise of the Space Age Millennials,' likely spoke for a lot of younger people on X when she posted, 'I hope to live to see humans walking on another world again. Artemis III can't come soon enough.' Her sentiment expresses a desire for something beautiful and glorious in a world often ugly and dispiriting. Come to think of it, that was the Apollo 11 moon landing in the midst of the turmoil of the 1960s. A lot of famous space influencers, such as former NASA administrator Jim Bridenstine, billionaire private space traveler Jared Isaacman, video blogger Eliana Sheriff and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk were not alive when men first walked on the moon. One word of caution should be made about how poll results can often be influenced by question-wording. In 2023, the Pew organization released a poll suggesting that returning to the moon and on to Mars were of lower priority than things like asteroid detection and measuring climate change. Nevertheless, when combining the answers 'top priority' and 'important but lower priority' space exploration still enjoyed healthy support, with 57 percent favoring a return to the moon and 56 percent going to Mars. People are looking forward to witnessing the first footsteps on the moon in over 50 years and the first ever on Mars. Donald Trump was the latest president of the United States to make that promise when he started the Artemis program during his first term. Now, he has to deliver. Unfortunately, President Trump is in serious danger of blowing it. Over six months into his second administration, America still does not have a permanent NASA administrator, thanks to Trump's capricious, last-minute withdrawal of Isaacman's nomination. The White House and the Congress are wrangling over NASA science funding and how long the space agency should retain the Orion Space Launch System architecture for returning to the moon. Trump needs to move quickly to nominate a permanent head of NASA. He could change his mind again about Isaacman, though he may be loath to admit to making a mistake. The White House also needs to reestablish the National Space Council as a center for the formulation of space policy. The council performed great service during the first Trump administration. It can do so again. Finally, Trump and Musk should resolve their feud. The most powerful man in the world and the world's richest man work better together than at cross purposes. Trump has won some great domestic and foreign policy victories. It will be a pity if his legacy is one of letting China get back to the moon before we do. Mark R. Whittington, who writes frequently about space policy, has published a political study of space exploration entitled ' Why is It So Hard to Go Back to the Moon? ' as well as ' The Moon, Mars and Beyond ' and, most recently, ' Why is America Going Back to the Moon? ' He blogs at Curmudgeons Corner.
