Editor Reviews:

Product Description:
The Tony Award—winning play that soars at the intersection of science and art, Copenhagenis an explosive re-imagining of the mysterious wartime meeting between two Nobel laureates to discuss the atomic bomb.

In 1941 the German physicist Werner Heisenberg made a clandestine trip to Copenhagen to see his Danish counterpart and friend Niels Bohr. Their work together on quantum mechanics and the uncertainty principle had revolutionized atomic physics. But now the world had changed and the two men were on opposite sides in a world war. Why Heisenberg went to Copenhagen and what he wanted to say to Bohr are questions that have vexed historians ever since. In Michael Frayn’s ambitious, fiercely intelligent, and daring new play Heisenberg and Bohr meet once again to discuss the intricacies of physics and to ponder the metaphysical—the very essence of human motivation.

Amazon.com Review:
For most people, the principles of nuclear physics are not only incomprehensible but inhuman. The popular image of the men who made the bomb is of dispassionate intellects who number-crunched their way towards a weapon whose devastating power they could not even imagine. But in his Tony Award-winning play Copenhagen, Michael Frayn shows us that these men were passionate, philosophical, and all too human, even though one of the three historical figures in his drama, Werner Heisenberg, was the head of the Nazis' effort to develop a nuclear weapon. The play's other two characters, the Danish physicist Niels Bohr and his wife, Margrethe, are involved with Heisenberg in an after-death analysis of an actual meeting that has long puzzled historians. In 1941, the German scientist visited Bohr, his old mentor and long-time friend, in Copenhagen. After a brief discussion in the Bohrs' home, the two men went for a short walk. What they discussed on that walk, and its implications for both scientists, have long been a mystery, even though both scientists gave (conflicting) accounts in later years.

Frayn's cunning conceit is to use the scientific underpinnings of atomic physics, from Schrödinger's famous cat to the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, to explore how an individual's point of view renders attempts to discover the ultimate truth of any human interaction fundamentally impossible. To Margrethe, Heisenberg was always an untrustworthy student, eager to steal from her husband's knowledge. To Bohr, Heisenberg was a brilliant if irresponsible foster son, whose lack of moral compass was part of his genius. As for Heisenberg, the man who could have built the bomb but somehow failed to, his dilemma is at the heart of the play's conflict. Frayn's clever dramatic structure, which returns repeatedly to particular scenes from different points of view, allows several possible theories as to what his motives could have been. This isn't the first play to successfully merge the worlds of science and theater (one is inevitably reminded of Tom Stoppard's Arcadia and Hapgood), but it's certainly one of the most dramatically successful. --John Longenbaugh

Rating : - Demise of Determinism
Why did Heisenberg come to Copenhagen? Was he there to prod his former mentor for information on America's nuclear program? Or, was he there to gloat? Perhaps to reach a bargain; we won't build it if you don't? Perhaps to warn Bohr: Leave now before it is too late. Or, merely to pick the brain of the old master? About that calculation, did you say two tons or two kilos? Then again, Bohr was a kind of deity. Could Heisenberg have come to him for absolution: Forgive me Father for I have sinned; the Nazis made me do it. Or, is it possible that a German could actually be a goodie. After all, Heisenberg never built "the" bomb. Indeed, after the war Heisenberg asserted that though he possessed the scientific ability to construct a bomb, he instead steered the Nazis towards the production of a reactor.
Uncertainty. It allows Frayne to explore science, morality, politics and memory, all of which are inexorably linked. Explore is the operative word, here. Nothing in the play is ever really resolved but Frayne does use Heisenberg's "uncertainty principle" to consider and explore the subjective nature of observation, which in this case relates not only to the workings of the atom but to the human mind as well.