Carl Robichaud

And I think the scene is fabricated, but it is based on the sentiment that he might have had at the time.

As they're embarking on the Manhattan Project, they are wondering whether the first Trinity test could result in the ignition of the atmosphere and lead to a chain reaction which destroys all of humanity.

And they run the calculations and they run them again and they realize that this possibility is vanishingly small.

It's essentially zero.

So Oppenheimer's talking to Einstein and he says, when I came to you with these calculations, we thought we might start a chain reaction that might destroy the entire world.

He turns to Einstein and he says, I believe we did.

And the question is, what did we set in motion with that first Trinity test?

Did we start this arms race inexorably, which would lead us to where we are today with 12,000 weapons, many of them on high alert, in this system in which we are all vulnerable forever?

I don't think we did.

If you look at the past 80 years, we've come right up to the brink, but then each time we've gained a little bit of wisdom and we've built these systems of governance, and you look at the nuclear nonproliferation regime to prevent the spread, and these various arms control treaties that have helped manage competition and hotlines that allowed for communications between adversaries,

All of these are imperfect ways of managing this technology, and we need to do better.

But I think Oppenheimer, looking at where we are today, if he could see where we're at, he'd be terrified by the number of weapons we've built, but I think he'd be also impressed at the international systems we've built to regulate these weapons.

And the International Atomic Energy Agency in some ways reflects his vision of international control over the peaceful uses of nuclear energy.

So it's really a mixed story.

Thank you.

Thank you.

I appreciate all you're doing.