1996年5月,在Dubna召开了一次回顾苏联核武器研制历史的会议。同年,俄罗斯核科学家Goncharov, G. A.发表了他在会议上提交的论文,比较详细的叙述了苏联氢弹的研制历史:American and Soviet H-bomb development programmes: historical background, Physics Uspekhi, 39, 10, pp. 1033-1044 (1996); Thermonuclear Milestones, Physic Today, 49, 11, pp. 44-61 (1996). Goncharov曾在Sakharov的领导下工作,是当年苏联第一颗分级热核氢弹装置RDS-37的理论设计者之一,作为直接当事人他亲历了苏联氢弹 突破的全过程。在文章撰写过程中,他又查阅和分析了大量历史文献和解密档案,因此他的叙述应该算是权威的。
此外,当年的苏联氢弹项目总负责人Khariton Y. B.和他的两位下属Adamskii V. B., Smirnov Y. N.也发表了一篇回忆文章:The way it was, The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, Nov 1996, pp 53-59. 这篇文章主要是根据记忆所写的,在一些细节问题上与Goncharov的文章略有出入。
2005年,Goncharov又发表了一篇文章,披露了更多的资料:The extraordinarily beautiful physical principle of thermonuclear charge design (on the occasion of the 50th anniversary of the test of RDS-37 — the first Soviet two-stage thermonuclear charge), Physics Uspekhi, 48, 11, pp. 1187-1196 (2005).
这些文章承认,在苏联研制氢弹的早期阶段,曾得到过英国科学家Klaus Fuchs的一些资料的帮助,但氢弹设计的窍门是苏联科学家自己研究出来的。
2009年1月,美国核科学家Thomas C. Reed和Danny B. Stillman合著的Nuclear Express一书出版,书中不点名的怀疑曾在Los Alamos工作过的一名美国科学家曾向苏联提供了氢弹的核心机密。美国历史学家Robert S. Norris随后根据书中的描述,指认出这名被怀疑的科学家是曾在50年代担任LANL的副主任的Darol Kenneth Froman。
Several of us in the theoretical department came up with the Third Idea at about the same time. I was one of them, and it seems to me that my early understanding of the Third Idea's physical and mathematical aspects, together with the authority I'd acquired, enabled me to play a decisive role in its adoption and implementation. True, Zel’dovich, Yuri Trunev, and others undoubtedly made significant contributions, and they may have grasped both the promise and the problems of the Third Idea as well as I did. At the time, in any case, we were all too busy (at least, I was) to worry about who received credit. Any assigning of honors at that time, moreover, would have been ‘skinning the bear before it was killed.’ Now it’s too late to recall who said what during our discussions. And does it really matter that much?
New ideas dawned upon us suddenly like light in a dark kingdom, and it was clear that the instant of truth had come. Rumors ascribed these fundamental thoughts in Teller’s spirit now to Zel’dovich, now to Sakharov, now to both, or to someone else, but always in some indecisive form: likely, possibly, and so on. By that time, I had come to know Zel’dovich quite closely, but never heard a direct confirmation from him on that score (as, indeed, directly from Sakharov). ... It is likewise a fact that there are no documents or reports associated with the new ideas, which could tell us who was the first or the originator.
他甚至暗示这一发现有可能来自核间谍的情报:
As I look back on those days and the role of the ‘American factor’ in our own research, I can say with certainty that we used no methods or any accurate figures received from the outside. However, I must confess that my colleagues and I had changed a great deal since the days of the Fuchs affair and the first atom bomb. We understood far more and could interpret tip-offs and hints. I cannot escape the feeling that we were extended a helping had once in a while, although quite inconspicuously.
Goncharov则说:Conceivably, the point was that scientific ethics did not permit Zeldovich and Sakharov to discuss priority matters without referring to intelligence.
1952年5月,H. Bethe在《关于热核武器研究史的备忘录》中把T-U构型称作一个“偶然的”发现,他认为Ulam想出要压缩热核材料、George试验所选用的辐射传 能机制、Teller对George试验数据的外推是一系列恰好发生的事件,难以想象苏联氢弹计划也走同样的发展路线。Teller则反对Bethe的说 法,他认为T-U构型是对各种已经提出来的想法的进一步研究的必然结果,他还(正确的)怀疑Fuchs可能早已把辐射内爆原理告诉了苏联人,而苏联人完全 可能在1951年T-U构型提出之前就已经找到了类似的构型。(Holloway D., Stalin and the bomb, Yale Uni. Press, 1994, p311)回顾苏联人突破氢弹的过程,我倒是觉得Teller的说法是有些道理的。如果苏联核武器计划的领导层能够将Fuchs的情报更早 更全面的加以公开,让技术人员充分民主的进行讨论(也就是我们在突破两弹过程中的“技术民主”),说不定苏联人确实可以抢在美国人之前突破大当量氢弹,而 不是在经典构型上花费如此多的时间和精力。
苏联的氢弹到底是不是独立研制的?苏联人确实独立的做了很多工作,但也确实通过核间谍手段获得了不少情报,尤其是在一个关键点上无法洗清间谍的嫌疑。在目 前俄罗斯政府不公开更多资料的情形下,这恐怕是一个说不清的问题。不过,如果我们更关心历史的结果而不是过程的话,正如Sakharov所说,does it really matter that much?