Skip to main content
Essay Undergraduate 1,749 words

Big Science, the Manhattan Project, and Modern Scientific Milestones

~9 min read 6 sections History · Manhattan Project
Abstract

This paper consists of two analytical essays on the history of modern science. The first examines Jeff Hughes's argument in The Manhattan Project, evaluating his claim that the atomic bomb program accelerated rather than created "Big Science," while assessing whether such large-scale, government-funded scientific enterprise was necessary. The second essay surveys key milestones in 20th-century science—from the Wright Brothers to ARPANET—exploring why humanity came to embrace scientific inquiry and whether modern science and technology have gradually liberated human beings from their natural condition. Together, the essays trace the historical development of scientific knowledge and its consequences for society.

Key Takeaways
  • Introduction to Big Science and the Manhattan Project: Thesis on Big Science and Manhattan Project's unprecedented scale
  • Was Big Science Necessary? Evaluating the Manhattan Project's Impact: Arguing atomic bomb saved millions of lives
  • Big Science Before and After the Bomb: Historical precedents and Big Science's postwar continuation
  • Key Milestones in Modern Scientific Development: Table of ten transformative 20th-century scientific achievements
  • Why Humanity Came to Accept Science: Science gained acceptance because it demonstrably worked
  • Science, Technology, and the Human Condition: Science as liberation versus natural human adaptation
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples

What makes this paper effective

  • The first essay engages directly with a primary source text (Hughes's The Manhattan Project), presenting a clear thesis that agrees with part of Hughes's argument while pushing back on what the student sees as an underestimation of the project's historical significance.
  • The second essay uses a well-organized table format to survey scientific milestones concisely before developing analytical arguments, demonstrating an ability to integrate structured evidence with discursive reasoning.
  • Both essays connect historical events to broader conceptual questions—about technological responsibility, human adaptation, and the limits of scientific objectivity—giving the paper intellectual depth beyond simple description.

Key academic technique demonstrated

The paper demonstrates the technique of qualified agreement: the student accepts the core of Hughes's thesis (that the Manhattan Project accelerated existing trends) while constructing a targeted critique (that Hughes underestimates the project's demarcating significance in modern history). This nuanced engagement with a secondary source is a hallmark of graduate-level historical analysis.

Structure breakdown

The paper is divided into two self-contained essays. Essay 1 opens with a thesis, works through historical examples and counterarguments, and closes with a reflective statement on technological responsibility. Essay 2 opens with a structured data table presenting milestones, then transitions into two analytical sections addressing humanity's acceptance of science and the question of liberation from the "natural condition." Citations follow APA format throughout.

Essay 1,749 words

Introduction to Big Science and the Manhattan Project

In The Manhattan Project, Jeff Hughes claims that the development of atomic weapons in World War II did not create "Big Science," but simply accelerated trends in scientific research and development that had already taken place. Furthermore, he suggests that these "Big Science" trends created serious problems in the direction of scientific research by the second half of the twentieth century — problems which many argued could be remedied by moving away from, or at least softening, the emphasis on "Big Science."

Although Hughes provides a thoughtful analysis of the emergence of Big Science — defined generally as scientific research and development (R&D) on a massive scale, with projects typically funded by a national government or a consortium of governmental agencies — he fails to assign proper credit to the impact that the ultra-top-secret Manhattan Project had on this process. Indeed, the Manhattan Project was unprecedented in multiple ways that define Big Science, most especially in the fact that the U.S. government, in loose collaboration with the U.K., responded to a potential existential threat by recruiting tens of thousands of scientists and support staff. In other words, the Manhattan Project marked that point in modern history when national governments began throwing enormous sums of money at scientific research.

Was Big Science Necessary? Evaluating the Manhattan Project's Impact

While it is reasonable to suggest that the Allies could have eventually won World War II without the atom bomb through the use of conventional weapons, this eventuality would have claimed far more lives — possibly tens of millions of additional casualties. Contemporary estimates indicated that at least one million Japanese lives and another 100,000 American lives would have been lost if an outright invasion of the Japanese homeland had been required to force Japan into unconditional surrender, as mandated by the Potsdam Declaration. While most Americans celebrated the ending of the war following the atomic bombings — Pearl Harbor still fresh in the national consciousness — many observers today lament their use, arguing the war was all but over and would have ended quickly without them. These observers are wrong.

Drawing on Einstein's discoveries and theoretical framework, and fueled by billions of dollars in national treasure, the scientific team at the Manhattan Project succeeded in outpacing Nazi Germany's efforts to develop atomic weapons and used this scientific knowledge to decisive effect in bringing the Japanese Empire to its knees. Moreover, the drive toward Big Science did not end when Fat Man was dropped on Nagasaki. The U.S. and other national governments continued to invest heavily in scientific research, contributing to the creation of many of the major research organizations that emerged during the latter half of the twentieth century (Hughes, 2016).

Big Science Before and After the Bomb

This is not to say, of course, that there had never been any "Big Science" enterprises prior to the Manhattan Project. It is reasonable to posit that ancient Egypt's counterpart to J. Robert Oppenheimer — Imhotep — managed to mobilize all of the scientific resources available to him in order to design the Great Pyramid and the other monumental structures that have endured to modern times. This point is also made by Hughes, who notes, "The scale and complexity of a science must obviously be seen in the context of its time" (p. 15). The Manhattan Project was, nonetheless, the demarcation point in modern history when unprecedented sums of money were focused on a specific scientific enterprise — a process that contributed to Americans landing on the Moon in 1969, the creation of the International Space Station (Bianco et al., 2017), and the construction of the CERN Large Hadron Collider (Canals et al., 2017).

In a more general sense, the same forces that drove the creation of Big Science to end World War II have also manifested in the private sector, as witnessed by SpaceX's major successes and countless other technological developments of modern life. As McClellan and Dorn (2006) point out, "In the twentieth and now twenty-first century, government and industry support for pure and applied science has only accelerated" (part IV). This outcome is not surprising given the pace of research and development in both the private and public sectors in recent decades, fueled in large part by the development of computers and the Internet, as well as technological innovations across multiple other fields. Canals et al. (2017) similarly note, "One can find examples of big science in diverse disciplines such as genomics, astronomy, nuclear fusion, and high-energy physics. In these fields, a large part of the budget allocated to scientific research comes from governmental or international funding agencies" (p. 961).

The foregoing examples suggest that Hughes was accurate in asserting that the Manhattan Project accelerated existing trends in scientific research and development, but he underestimates the project's significance in demonstrating what Big Science actually looks like and what it is capable of achieving in the modern era. In addition, Big Science per se is not responsible for the problems associated with technological development, just as the Manhattan Project was not solely responsible for delivering the two atom bombs dropped on Japan. What humans actually do — or fail to do — with the results of Big Science research is the fundamental source of any problems that may result, as clearly witnessed in the meltdown at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant in 1986 and the looming threats of nuclear conflict today. There is no turning back, however, and the Big Science juggernaut will continue to create new technologies for which humankind may or may not be prepared, but which will become reality regardless of how they are used.

Key Milestones in Modern Scientific Development

Some of the key milestones in modern science that most clearly exemplify the manner in which scientific knowledge and practice emerged as part of a historical process are highlighted below.

Wright Brothers fly at Kitty Hawk, NC (1903): Orville flew the "Wright Flyer" — now hanging in the Smithsonian's National Air and Space Museum — in the first powered, controlled flight of a heavier-than-air aircraft, directly leading to modern aviation and space exploration.

Einstein's theory of relativity is introduced (1905): Einstein's publication on the theory of relativity identified the relationship between matter and energy, and space and time, making the development of nuclear energy — and nuclear weapons — possible.

Alexander Fleming discovers penicillin (1930): The discovery of a substance capable of fighting infections in humans revolutionized infectious disease control and advanced the understanding of pathogens, including the development of a wide array of antibiotics.

Max Knoll and Ernst Ruska invent the electron microscope (1931): The electron microscope gave humans the ability to investigate biological and other samples at the cellular level, transforming biology and materials science.

The Manhattan Project (1942): This initiative created the world's first atomic weapons, used in 1945, and has since led to the development of a broad range of peaceful and military applications of nuclear technology.

Invention of the transistor (1947): Bell Laboratory scientists invented the transistor, which replaced hot, bulky vacuum tubes and facilitated the development of digital computing and microprocessors.

Expanded applications of plastics (1951): The discovery of polypropylene made it possible to manufacture an enormous array of products that are ubiquitous today.

Sputnik is placed in Earth orbit (1957): The successful launch of the Soviet Union's satellite inaugurated the Space Age and led to the crowded near-Earth orbital environment of today.

The microchip is invented (1959): Working independently, researchers from Texas Instruments and Fairchild Semiconductor invented the microchip, now used in virtually every device humans rely on.

ARPANET is created (1969): The linking of two computers at Stanford University would eventually lead to the creation of the Internet, which has profoundly transformed human existence.

2 Sections Hidden · 350 words
Why Humanity Came to Accept Science155 words
The milestones listed above highlight the manner in which scientific knowledge and practice emerged as part of a historical process. Historically speaking, humankind came to accept the value of scientific inquiry…
Science, Technology, and the Human Condition195 words
If humankind's "natural condition" is conceptualized as living in cold, dark caves surrounded by apex predators and raw food, science and technology in the modern world can be said to have a gradually liberating effect. Conceptualized instead as humankind taking advantage of every new technological innovation…

References

Bianco, W., Gerhart, D., & Nicolson, C. S. (2017). Waypoints for evaluating big science. Social Science Quarterly, 98(4), 1144–1150.

Canals, A., Ortoll, E., & Nordberg, M. (2017). Collaboration networks in big science: The ATLAS experiment at CERN. El Profesional de la Información, 26(5), 961–971.

Hughes, J. (2016). The Manhattan Project: Big science and the atom bomb (Revolutions in Science). Columbia University Press.

McClellan, J. E., & Dorn, H. (2006). Science and technology in world history. Johns Hopkins University Press.

Key Concepts in This Paper
Big Science Manhattan Project Atomic Bomb Government Funding Scientific Milestones Nuclear Energy Technological Innovation Human Adaptation Scientific Inquiry Cold War Science
Cite This Paper
PaperDue. (2026). Big Science, the Manhattan Project, and Modern Scientific Milestones. PaperDue. https://www.paperdue.com/study-guide/big-science-manhattan-project-scientific-milestones-2177348

Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.