1 8 4 D O C U M E N T 4 6 J U N E 1 9 2 0
Perhaps a considerably more careful calculation of the irradiation curves (even the
first of Ehrenhaft’s curves for Au are faulty, as Fürth has already pointed out) will
lead to useful
results.[10]
The fact that Mrs. Norst arrived at up to 100% larger particle radii than did G.
Laski seems to me to be a remarkable approximation of the particle radii of Brown-
ian motion. In addition, there are some neglected factors in the law of falling bod-
ies, whose elimination seems to lead to a larger radius as well. All these things thus
are not exactly favorable to the
“subelectron.”[11]
Quite recently, now, I overheard a conversation between Von Mises and
Zerner,[12]
from which I gathered that the elementary quantum has now finally re-
vealed itself to Ehrenhaft himself. Prof. von Mises, using observations that had
been carried out by Ehrenhaft, apparently carried out calculations according to
Weyl’s cyclical error theory which furnish the electron charge as the mean value.
Naturally, Ehrenhaft does not quite believe it yet; to me, at least, he said that new
measurements would still have to be taken. If one adds to this that Bär has purport-
edly brought about the fall of the “branching
method,”[13]
one can, I think, predict
the “official” end of the “subelectron” in the not too distant future. For I do grant
Ehrenhaft that much objectivity, of eventually turning away, under the weight of the
evidence, from his own idea, which seems to have been misleading him for over 10
years now. At least I hope that he will allow the electron to live on as a “statistical”
“mean value.”
Soon Thirring will be reporting on the new paper by Majorana (absorption of
gravitation) at the local
colloquium.[14]
The general theory of relativity does indeed
foresee a “screening effect” of gravitating
masses.[15]
Could this Majorana effect per-
haps involve the first effect detectable in the laboratory of the theory of gravitation?
With my best compliments to you, Professor, I remain as ever your sincerely
grateful,
Adolf Smekal.
46. To Paul Ehrenfest
[Berlin,] Sunday. [6 June
1920][1]
Dear Ehrenfest,
I have been here already for almost a week and it’s only today that I’m writing
you, rascal that I am. The journey was quite comfortable and easy. I did not fuss