4
DOCS.
FOR
VOLS.
1
&
5
JULY 1901-FEBRUARY
1909
But
now, my
greetings
and kisses from the bottom
of
my
heart,
and write
back
soon.
Yours,
D[ollie]
Miss
Popova
is
jealous
of
me
Miss
Engelbrecht,[13]
which
naturally
amuses
me,
and whenever
we
3
meet she
gets annoyed.
Vol.
5,
136a. From Dmitry Mirimanoff[1]
la
Ferme, Cannes, 5
February 1909
Sir,
Allow
me
to make
some
remarks
the
note
that
you kindly
directed to
me.[2]
It
is
exactly
right
that
vector Q
is
none
other
than
Minkowski's vector
m,
which
you
denote
by
the letter h.
I
thought
it
was
obvious. In
my paper,
however,
the
l[etter][3]
h
denotes Lorentz’s vector.
It
is
clearly
this that
I
say
on
p.
193:
“But,
vector
Q does
not
signify
the
magnet. energy”
(for
Lorentz,
of
course,
not
for
Minkowski).[4]
And
it
is
precisely
in order to avoid confusion
that
I
assigned a
different
letter
to
this
vector. For
I
take Lorentz’s
point
of
view. I
the
following
hypotheses:
(1)
I
assume as
true
Lorentz’s
differ.
equats.
(I
do
not
say
that
I
believe
them
to
be
true;
my personal opinion
is of
little
importance.)[5]
I
suppose
that
vectors
E,
h,
etc.,
exist
(an
indep.
defin.
of
the
princ.
of
relativity).
I
apply to
these
equ.
Lorentz’s
transf.
and
[...]
approximately,
one can
find transform. forms. such
that
Lorentz’s
equats.
are
not
modified
by
the transf.
I
give
these forms.
(2)
I
assume
true
the
principle
postulate
of
relativity,
in
other
words,
I
suppose
that
Lorentz’s
equats.
are
not
altered
by
Lorentz’s transforms.
And
I
intend
to find
the
relations
that
together
form
a
with the
fundam.
quant[ities]
before and
after transformation.
I have
no
other aim.
I know
that the
problem presents
no
difficulty
at all and
that the
solution
is straightforward,
but
I
thought
it
not
to
present
it. Vector Q
plays only
an
ancil. role in
my
pap[er].
I
could have
omitted
it,
just
as
I
could
h[ave]
omitted
vector
U,[6]
since
the transf.
form[ula]s can
be
obtained
in
a more
direct
man[ner].
They
certain[ly]
can
be derived from those
of
Mink.,
but
actually they
follow
from
the
fund.
th.
of Lorentz-Poincaré
(th.
of
relat.).
Is
it
necessary
to
that
I
do
not
propose any
new
th[eory]?
The
equats.
I-IV
are
those
of Lorentz;
the
transf.
forms. for
B,
M,
etc.,
are
the
necessary
Previous Page Next Page