666
DOCS.
632,
633
OCTOBER
1918
from
S
and
S',
since
through
the
Lorentz
contraction the
time of
contact became
too brief.
It
is also
my
opinion
that
a
decision
on
constant
l
in
the transfor-
mation
equations
is,
in
principle, possible through
experience; by
no means
is
a
mere
convention involved here.
What
I
maintain
is just
that
the
experiments by
Fizeau and Michelson cannot
bring
about this
decision
but rather
leave
open
the
quantity
of
l.
Therefore
the
question
is
whether other
experiments
can
decide
the
question.
Now,
it
would
interest
me
very
much to find out
which
experiments
you
view
as
the
finally
decisive
ones on
the
laws
of motion of
the
electron.[6]
For,
as
far
as
my
knowledge
of
the literature
goes,
nowhere did
I find
any
statement
about
a
final decision.
It
would be
possible, though,
that another
publication I
do not know
about
succeeded
Hupka
(1910).[7]
Hupka says
(Annalen,
33,
p. 402):
“I
would like to
emphasize again
that
the last
word has not
yet
been
spoken
on
this
subject.”
Likewise,
Laue
says
in his book
(2nd ed.,
1913, p.
18),[8]
that the
“opinions on
the
conclusiveness
of the
experiments by
Bucherer,
Ratnowsky,[9]
and
Hupka
are so
divided
that the
theory of relativity
has
certainly
not
yet
ob-
tained
unconditionally
reliable
support
from
this
quarter.”
Lorentz likewise
says
in
Hinneberg,
Kultur
der
Gegenwart (Physics,
p.
332),
thus
still
in
1915:
“Various
experiments along
this
line have been
performed; however,
final
and
concurrent
results
have
yet
to be
obtained.”[10] So
it would interest
me
greatly
if
you
could
indicate
to
me on
which
papers you
base
your
opinion
that the
problem
is
solved,
and
specifically,
I
would be
grateful
for
an
exact
bibliographic
reference,
since
the
local
library unfortunately
does
not
have
the
Annalen and
I
consequently
cannot
research it.
Unfortunately
there
is not
enough space anymore
today
for the other
issues;
I
shall
thus
seek to show
you
another
time
that
you
have
two
meanings
for
E'
when
applying
it in
the
derivation of
equation
(113).[11]
And
on
the other
hand,
you
should
clarify
for
yourself
sometime the fact
that
you
do
not
maintain
the
clock
paradox
in
the
way
it
appears
in
the
first
paper,[12]
since there it
is
deduced from
two
justified systems!
Cordial
regards, yours,
Fr.
Adler.
633.
To
Edgar Meyer
[Berlin,
after
12
October
1918][1]
Dear
Mr.
Meyer,
I
thank
you sincerely
for
the
kind
news.
Obviously,
I
did
not
expect
any
reply
to
my proposal yet,
because
the
holidays
had
already
arrived in
the
meantime.[2]
At all
events,
I
would be
pleased
if
I
were
bound
by
real ties to dear old Zurich
Previous Page Next Page