Author |
Topic: Historical What-If (Read 885 times) |
|
Barukh
Uberpuzzler
Gender: 
Posts: 2276
|
 |
Historical What-If
« on: Sep 7th, 2007, 9:45am » |
 Quote  Modify
|
Here are 3 events that happened on our poor Earth ~ 60 years ago:
1. May 8, 1945: Nazi Germany surrenders.
2. July 16, 1945: First atomic bomb is successfully tested.
3. August 6, 1945: An atomic bomb was used for the first time in war operations on Japan.
Now let's imagine that event 1 doesn't happen before event 2. Would event 3 happen at different time / place?
|
|
 IP Logged |
|
|
|
Sameer
Uberpuzzler
Pie = pi * e
Gender:
Posts: 1261
|
|
Re: Historical What-If
« Reply #1 on: Sep 7th, 2007, 9:57am » |
Quote Modify
|
For the question, should event 1 happen after event 2? Or is it that just event 2 happened?
|
|
IP Logged |
"Obvious" is the most dangerous word in mathematics.
--Bell, Eric Temple
Proof is an idol before which the mathematician tortures himself.
Sir Arthur Eddington, quoted in Bridges to Infinity
|
|
|
Barukh
Uberpuzzler
Gender:
Posts: 2276
|
|
Re: Historical What-If
« Reply #2 on: Sep 7th, 2007, 10:08am » |
Quote Modify
|
The point is this: event 2 happens; event 1 had not happened yet, but almost everybody wishes it happens as fast as possible.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Sameer
Uberpuzzler
Pie = pi * e
Gender:
Posts: 1261
|
|
Re: Historical What-If
« Reply #3 on: Sep 7th, 2007, 11:04am » |
Quote Modify
|
Alright as my history knowledge on WW 2 tells me that US got involved in war only because of Japan's attack on Pearl Harbor. Until then it was neutral however it did conduct covert operations, espionage and funded money into allied states causing germany's retaliations on its battleships,etc. I think in that case if Japan had not attacked US, then the likelihood of event 3 would be very very small. US wouldn't have gotten involved in the war!!
I would say event 3 wouldn't have happened if event 4 didn't happen (event 4: Japan attacks US). So given we only have 3 events in the question, it will happen on the same place!!!
|
|
IP Logged |
"Obvious" is the most dangerous word in mathematics.
--Bell, Eric Temple
Proof is an idol before which the mathematician tortures himself.
Sir Arthur Eddington, quoted in Bridges to Infinity
|
|
|
ThudnBlunder
wu::riddles Moderator
Uberpuzzler
The dewdrop slides into the shining Sea
Gender:
Posts: 4489
|
|
Re: Historical What-If
« Reply #4 on: Sep 7th, 2007, 11:47am » |
Quote Modify
|
It does not follow that had Japan not attacked US then US would not have entered the war at a later stage.
Basically Barukh is asking NOT(1 before 2) => NOT(3)?
If US had had the bomb before Germany surrendered I doubt if they would have dropped it on Europe.
However, I am sure Stalin would have had no such scruples prior to Stalingrad.
And there is evidence that Eisenhower considered using it during the Korean War.
http://www.centurychina.com/history/faq7.shtml
If US had not used it against Japan I think they would have used it here.
And then there is Nixon, who seriously considered the need to "drop the Big One" on North Vietnam.
|
| « Last Edit: Sep 7th, 2007, 2:14pm by ThudnBlunder » |
IP Logged |
THE MEEK SHALL INHERIT THE EARTH.....................................................................er, if that's all right with the rest of you.
|
|
|
Sameer
Uberpuzzler
Pie = pi * e
Gender:
Posts: 1261
|
|
Re: Historical What-If
« Reply #5 on: Sep 7th, 2007, 1:49pm » |
Quote Modify
|
Right!! Because of the historical perspective there are so many variables here!! But I just looked at it this way!! Everything happens the same way except germany surrenders later than the usual i.e. event 1 happens later than event 2. Everything else is still unchanged i.e. all other historical facts still happen the same way!! Under these conditions it leads me to think event 3 will happen at the same time and place it happened before.
Now only Barukh can define the scope of "what if" I think!! 
|
|
IP Logged |
"Obvious" is the most dangerous word in mathematics.
--Bell, Eric Temple
Proof is an idol before which the mathematician tortures himself.
Sir Arthur Eddington, quoted in Bridges to Infinity
|
|
|
ima1trkpny
Senior Riddler
"Double click on 'Yes'... Hey!"
Gender: 
Posts: 452
|
|
Re: Historical What-If
« Reply #6 on: Sep 7th, 2007, 1:55pm » |
Quote Modify
|
Interesting question... I think it is highly probable it may still have worked out that way even having the surrender of Germany happening after the first successful testing. Germany was pretty much beat and their top military officials knew it and had been begging Hitler and others to see reason for awhile...
But Japanese are very very proud and while normally very quiet polite people, when they feel threatened or mother Japan is threatened they go nuts... almost all of them were willing to die for their country and their emperor and had been convinced by propoganda that if the U.S. was allowed to successfully invade that they would all be raped and mutilated etc... (ever seen the pictures of the families literally jumping off cliffs to their deaths to make sure they would never be caught by U.S. soldiers?) And the Island hopping necessary to actually deploy a successful invasion of the mainland would have incurred hugely bloody battles because every step closer would have meant they would have fought even harder to repel. In the end, tragic and awful as the detonations were, it probably saved thousands and thousands of lives on both sides. 
|
| « Last Edit: Sep 7th, 2007, 1:56pm by ima1trkpny » |
IP Logged |
"The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty." -Churchill
|
|
|
towr
wu::riddles Moderator
Uberpuzzler
Some people are average, some are just mean.
Gender:
Posts: 13730
|
|
Re: Historical What-If
« Reply #7 on: Sep 7th, 2007, 3:30pm » |
Quote Modify
|
For 1 not to happen before 2, some drastic changes would have to have happened during the war, because it's not like Germany had much choice left but to surrender at that point, they were soundly beaten.
So for the alternate timeline, how much more succesfull would they have been in the defense? Say, would the Ardennes Offensive (aka Battle of the Bulge) have worked out for them? Or Stalingrad? Germany was losing from '43 or so onwards, which is why the allies put their plans to assasinate Hitler on hold, he was doing them a big favor by mucking up his war.
|
|
IP Logged |
Wikipedia, Google, Mathworld, Integer sequence DB
|
|
|
Aryabhatta
Uberpuzzler
Gender:
Posts: 1321
|
|
Re: Historical What-If
« Reply #8 on: Sep 7th, 2007, 3:56pm » |
Quote Modify
|
on Sep 7th, 2007, 3:30pm, towr wrote:
<snip>
Germany was losing from '43 or so onwards, which is why the allies put their plans to assasinate Hitler on hold, he was doing them a big favor by mucking up his war. |
|
Yes. It would be funny if they actually even attempted to stop assasination attempts on Hitler... Might make a good movie.
I read a book, "How Hiltler could have won the war" (or a similar sounding title), seems like he came pretty close to actually winning the war before he went crazy and mucked it up.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
ima1trkpny
Senior Riddler
"Double click on 'Yes'... Hey!"
Gender:
Posts: 452
|
|
Re: Historical What-If
« Reply #9 on: Sep 7th, 2007, 4:17pm » |
Quote Modify
|
on Sep 7th, 2007, 3:56pm, Aryabhatta wrote:
Yes. It would be funny if they actually even attempted to stop assasination attempts on Hitler... Might make a good movie.
I read a book, "How Hiltler could have won the war" (or a similar sounding title), seems like he came pretty close to actually winning the war before he went crazy and mucked it up.
|
|
Oh yes... had he let his generals do what they were good at he may very well have won... 0.0 just got too big headed and thought he knew better the ways of war from his short stint as a leutenant than people who had spend their entire lives studying tactics from masters and applying their learning...
|
|
IP Logged |
"The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty." -Churchill
|
|
|
JiNbOtAk
Uberpuzzler
Hana Hana No Mi
Gender:
Posts: 1187
|
|
Re: Historical What-If
« Reply #10 on: Sep 7th, 2007, 5:36pm » |
Quote Modify
|
on Sep 7th, 2007, 9:45am, Barukh wrote:| Now let's imagine that event 1 doesn't happen before event 2. Would event 3 happen at different time / place? |
|
Of course event 3 would happen; since when mankind knew how to respect the powers bestowed upon them ? If not Japan then, there would always be another president, itching to test the awesome powers of an atomic bomb. The world war is a good reason as any.
|
|
IP Logged |
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
|
|
|
mikedagr8
Uberpuzzler
A rich man is one who is content; not wealthy.
Gender:
Posts: 1105
|
|
Re: Historical What-If
« Reply #11 on: Sep 8th, 2007, 2:26am » |
Quote Modify
|
Well, if the US hadn't used the technology they had, it would only be a matter of time before Germany had it. They were the first to split the atom, at the beginning of the war (just learnt yesterday, we are starting to learn about nulcear energy  ) I believe that event 3 would still have occured at some stage, I mean, the US was ambashed when negotiating with Japan, when they get attacked on Pearl Harbour. They had every right to respond in the way they did. Well those are my thoughts.
|
|
IP Logged |
"It's not that I'm correct, it's that you're just not correct, and so; I am right." - M.P.E.
|
|
|
TenaliRaman
Uberpuzzler
I am no special. I am only passionately curious.
Gender:
Posts: 1001
|
|
Re: Historical What-If
« Reply #12 on: Sep 8th, 2007, 3:00am » |
Quote Modify
|
on Sep 8th, 2007, 2:26am, mikedagr8 wrote:| They had every right to respond in the way they did. Well those are my thoughts. |
|
Hmm, if you think attack on the civilians is the same as attack on a military base, then i really cant say much, but if you dont, then you might as well change that sentence.
-- AI
|
|
IP Logged |
Self discovery comes when a man measures himself against an obstacle - Antoine de Saint Exupery
|
|
|
mikedagr8
Uberpuzzler
A rich man is one who is content; not wealthy.
Gender:
Posts: 1105
|
|
Re: Historical What-If
« Reply #13 on: Sep 8th, 2007, 3:08am » |
Quote Modify
|
on Sep 8th, 2007, 3:00am, TenaliRaman wrote:
Hmm, if you think attack on the civilians is the same as attack on a military base, then i really cant say much, but if you dont, then you might as well change that sentence.
-- AI |
|
I should change, but what I meant was to use the technology and the weapon. I mean, the Japanese were cowards, ran away from problems, treated the Chinese like sh*t, and were provocative as well as being offered a truce, but still denied it. The second attack was only to enhance the message.
Civilian casualties should never be part of war, but it seems they always are, and particular countries such as the US are taking the blame for doing so, even though, they are not always aiming for the civilians.
An example of when civilians are the casualty of war, is Israel. Israel take many civillian casualties, and when they respond to attack a base, the base is normally hidden in a civilian area. I'm sure Barukh would have something to say about this.
There is a cartoon I have seen where an Israeli soldier is protecting a baby from a terrorist who is using a human shiled of a baby. So wwhat is seen going across from left to right is baby, IDF soldier, a brick wall, baby, terrorist.
|
| « Last Edit: Sep 8th, 2007, 3:46am by mikedagr8 » |
IP Logged |
"It's not that I'm correct, it's that you're just not correct, and so; I am right." - M.P.E.
|
|
|
Barukh
Uberpuzzler
Gender:
Posts: 2276
|
|
Re: Historical What-If
« Reply #14 on: Sep 8th, 2007, 4:03am » |
Quote Modify
|
I am glad this initiated such a lively discussion.
I deliberately had not restrict your imagination. To be more specific: what if event 2 had happened in November 1944?
on Sep 7th, 2007, 3:30pm, towr wrote:| Germany was losing from '43 or so onwards |
|
Wasn’t it the same with Japanese? When US decided to use the atomic weapon on Japanese wasn’t it obvious what will be the outcome of this war? The official argument to drop the bomb was to save lives of Japanese and – primarily American citizens.
It’s interesting that the US military death casualties were greater in Europe-Atlantic theater than Asia-Pacific by a factor of 1.7 (source)
Another thing to remember is the whole project was initiated because of the threat Germans, not Japanese, will make it first.
It turned out this threat was very much exaggerated, so:
on Sep 8th, 2007, 2:26am, mikedagr8 wrote:| Well, if the US hadn't used the technology they had, it would only be a matter of time before Germany had it. |
|
That’s a very far fetched conclusion. You should learn more.
Quote:| They were the first to split the atom, at the beginning of the war |
|
When?
Bottom Line: Would US drop the bomb on Germans if they could?
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
mikedagr8
Uberpuzzler
A rich man is one who is content; not wealthy.
Gender:
Posts: 1105
|
|
Re: Historical What-If
« Reply #15 on: Sep 8th, 2007, 4:14am » |
Quote Modify
|
on Sep 8th, 2007, 4:03am, Barukh wrote:
That’s a very far fetched conclusion. You should learn more.
When?
|
|
My source is my text booklet. Area of Study 4: Nuclear Energy
Quote:In 1939, two German scientists, Otto Hahn and Fritz Strassman, made an accidental discovery that was to change the world. They were bombarding a sample of uranium with neutrons and were amazed to find some barium was produced. Lise Meitner and Otto Frisch working in Sweden, proposed that the uranium nucleus had split in half. Meitner named the process fission, after a simliar process of cell division in biology. The process fission releases a considerable energy from the nucleus of the atom, and it is from this that we get the term nuclear energy.
Scientists first released nuclear energy on a large scale at the Universtiy of Chicago in 1942. |
|
So I conclude that Germany had split the atom at around the time of the beginning of the war. Germany had the technology, but were not aware of the critical mass required to create such a large force.
Also from the booklet
Quote:| The U-235 used in the Hiroshima atomic blast was about the size of a baseball. |
|
|
| « Last Edit: Sep 8th, 2007, 4:14am by mikedagr8 » |
IP Logged |
"It's not that I'm correct, it's that you're just not correct, and so; I am right." - M.P.E.
|
|
|
|
RIDDLES SITE
WRITE MATH!
Home 
Help 
Search 
Members 
Login 
Register
Reply
Notify of replies
Send Topic
Print