V O L U M E 9 , D O C U M E N T 2 3 9 a 1 4 5
Apparent brightness
surf. temperature
and parallax
the radius of each of the individual
stars.[5]
How do they come out?
3) After determining the radii by methods (1) and (2), how large are the resulting
real masses from these and from the measured gravitational effects?
4) Do the thus obtained masses agree, within the margins of error, with those ob-
tained from Newton’s law and Doppler’s
principle?[6]
—————
Regarding your paper, also the following. The determination of the parallax does
seem to me to be based on shadow-boxing, because the gravitational effect does not
seem to enter into the magnitude at all, but only the radii determined by the
occultations. is simply a volume, and therefore has virtually nothing to do with
the gravitational effect.[7] Furthermore, I suspect that your assumed value solar
density is an inconsistent assumption; can this “conventional” assumption be up-
held independently of the “conventional” opinions about the masses of B-stars?
Am I not sitting on the branch I myself have sawn
off?[8]
You must definitely en-
lighten me about
this.[9]
Best regards from your,
A. Einstein.
Vol. 9, 239a. From Paul Winteler
31 December 1919
Dear Albert,
I received your letter, according to which I was supposed to settle accounts with
SAG,[1]
and paid the amount of about 4,937 francs, which was due according to
the statement of current account submitted to me by the SAG. I transferred the re-
mainder of about 63 francs to the Zürcher Kantonalbank under your name.
I had hesitated with these transactions, and when no further report arrived I never
carried them out. Now I still have the amount outstanding for
Ko[ppel][2]
here un-
der my name, namely 6,400 francs at KÊs disposal. Since the repayment to SAG,
as mentioned above, has already taken place, I would think you could get in touch
M
d
---- -
2 /3
M
d
---- -
1-
10
-----