I interpret your question meaning "Was <PERSON> work required (or substantial) in the creation of the atomic bomb", the answer being a definitive "NO". Because:
* It was not the Middle Ages. In the XXth century, it was already well stablished that "explossive" == "relases a lot of energy quickly". Once a way was discovered to release such energy was found, you automatically got the atomic bomb scientific base and only that was left was an engineering task.
* <PERSON> does not provide any insight that would have inspired the discovery such a method to increase the energy release. 682
He just mixes some "hot" (for the time) scientific terms and "technomagically" invents "Carolinum"1.
* <PERSON> was not the only one researching atomic energy, and not the only one to see its potentials if a method for controlling the reaction speed could be controlled. Note the big "if", which is what really matters for the scientific progress, and which is absent of <PERSON> novel2.
To put an example, as soon as antimatter (and its violent relation to normal matter) was discovered/made public, lots of SF books about antimatter guns/bomb/cannons/whatever were "invented".
Could you say that, in case that an antimatter weapon was developed, that any of those works did "inspire" the development of the actual weapon? Hardly, because it was an idea so evident that it did not need inspiration.
The actual inspiration could come by an autor explaining how to produce / manage antimatter in an effective way that happens to be actually effective.
And for other meanings of "inspiration" (more to come as comments appear, I think):
* <PERSON> was not a salesman that read <PERSON> book, though "hey, it is cool", did set up his own laboratory and found the idea of chain reaction. He was already an scientific studying the atomic structure. So no "inspiration" there.
Also, note that Wikipedia entry on <PERSON> tells a very different story.
1: Do not think that I dismiss <PERSON> as a SF writer; The World Set Free is a marvelous example of SF (as, a work set in an imaginary set due to scientific advancements*). It is just not science.
2: Again, as a SF writer, it was not <PERSON> work to discover/explain such a method. 805