D O C U M E N T 4 3 L I G H T I N D I S P E R S I V E M E D I A 6 3
not know; but he certainly did not lie. There cannot be any question of a genuine
denial;[11]
at most one could say that it is objectionable to reproduce private con-
versations in the press without authorization. Best would be, however, to say noth-
ing at all, because one would thus at most stir up the issue again. Paper is forbearing
and the newspaper reader forgetful—in a couple of years we shall all be dead and
the new generation will fret over and amuse themselves again with new follies. I
send you the article back in the same post.
P.S. An honest person should be respected, even if he holds and defends different
views from one’s
own.[12]
42. From Gregory Breit[1]
Leyden, 31 January 1922
[Not selected for translation.]
43. “On the Theory of Light Propagation
in Dispersive Media”
[Einstein 1922f]
Submitted 2 February 1922
Published 27 February 1922
In: Preußische Akademie der Wissenschaften (Berlin). Physikalisch-mathematische
Klasse. Sitzungsberichte (1922): 18–22.
In a notice that just recently appeared in these
Berichte,[1]
I proposed an optical ex-
periment for which, based on my reflections, the undulatory theory would lead one
to expect results that are at odds with the quantum theory. The reasoning was as fol-
lows. A canal-ray particle moving within the focal plane of a lens generates light
with eccentric surfaces of equal phase that by the lens’s diffraction are transformed
into nonparallel planes (a “fanned out” system of planes). In such light the frequen-
cy, hence also the propagation velocity, is a function of location. If one lets such a
[p. 18]
Previous Page Next Page