3 6 4 D O C U M E N T 3 0 8 N O V E M B E R 1 9 2 1
[5]Wolfgang Pauli.
[6]Wilhelm Lenz.
[7]Niels Bohr.
[8]Born and Bródy 1921a and 1921b; Born 1921b and 1921c.
[9]Michael Polányi held that there was not yet a model for chemical reactions that yielded a law for
the reaction velocity that was in agreement with the laws of thermodynamics (Polányi 1920b; see also
Polányi 1920a, 1920c). He sought to remedy this by assuming that reactions occurred through “atom
jumps—in analogy to Bohr’s electron jumps” (“den Bohrschen Elektronensprüngen analoge—Atom-
sprünge” [Polányi 1920d, p. 110]); the energy for these was given by neither mechanical energy nor
heat radiation (Polányi 1920e).
[10]Irving Langmuir (1881–1957), research scientist and associate director at the Research Labo-
ratory of General Electric Company in Schenectady, N.Y.
[11]Polányi 1921.
[12]Rudolf Minkowski (1895–1976) obtained a doctorate from the University of Breslau in 1921;
his uncle Hermann Minkowski (1864–1909) had been Professor of Higher Mathematics at the Swiss
Federal Institute of Technology and at the University of Göttingen.
[13]Carl Ramsauer (1879–1955), Professor of Physics at the Technical University in Danzig; see
Ramsauer 1921 on his lecture at the meeting of the German Physical Society in Jena from 18 to 24
September 1921.
[14]In the following equation, F is the electron distribution function, X the force, m the electron
mass, a velocity component, and x and t are space and time coordinates.
[15]Hertha Sponer (1895–1968), Assistentin at the University of Göttingen.
[16]For their results on argon and other noble gases that confirmed Ramsauer’s claim that the mean
free path increased for slow electrons, see Minkowski and Sponer 1923 (for similar results, see also
Sponer 1923 and Minkowski 1923).
[17]Philipp Lenard. Johann von Soldner (ca. 1777–1833), former conservator at the observatory of
the Munich Academy of Sciences in Bogenhausen. Lenard had been agitating against relativity since
at least 1917 (see Vol. 7, the editorial note, “Einstein’s Encounters with German Anti-Relativists,” pp.
101–113, and Einstein to Ilse and Margot Einstein, 24 September 1920 [Vol. 10, Doc. 154]). Recently,
he had republished parts of Soldner 1801 in Lenard 1921. Soldner had found a deflection of light
passing the Sun when treating light as a heavy body in Newton’s theory of gravity. His value for the
deflection was 0.84 arc seconds, close to Einstein’s original value of 0.83 arc seconds in Einstein
1911h (Vol. 3, Doc. 23), which had been derived on the basis of the principle of equivalence alone.
In light of recent eclipse observations that had yielded a value of 1.60
0.3 arc seconds (on these
observations, see Vol. 9, Introduction, pp. xxxi–xxxvii), Lenard claimed that Einstein’s 1915 predic-
tion of 1.7 arc seconds, following from the general theory of relativity (see Einstein 1915h [Vol. 6,
Doc. 24]), was probably wrong, since refraction in the atmosphere of the Sun still had to be accounted
for; this then made Soldner’s value more likely to be correct. Lenard further objected that Einstein’s
1911 result could be equivalent to Soldner’s, but rather felt that in this derivation the theory of rela-
tivity had been “interwoven with the result artificially and for the sake of appearances” (“sie ist nur
künstlich und zum Schein mit dem Resultat verwoben” [Lenard 1921, p. 597]); on Soldner, see Jaki
1978 and Eisenstaedt 1991.
[18]The Frankfurter Zeitung, in a report on Lenard’s article (Lenard 1921), stated that Einstein had
the good fortune to live through the confirmation of his prediction, thus “all the glamor of the discov-
ery shone on [Einstein],” whereas “Soldner sank into oblivion!” (“aller Entdeckungsglanz fiel auf
[Einstein]. Soldner ward Vergessenheit!”, Baumgardt 1921).
[19]Max von Laue (Laue 1921c; see also Laue 1921b) argued that Einstein had made a singular con-
tribution by predicting a relativistic deflection in the context of the wave theory of light; he regarded
comparisons between Soldner (who had used an emission theory of light) and Einstein to be a “bitter
injustice” (“bitteres Unrecht”, Laue 1921c).
David Hilbert (1862–1942), Professor of Mathematics at the University of Göttingen, together
with Born, wrote that Soldner 1801 contained the same relation for the deflection of light as Einstein
1911h (Vol. 3, Doc. 23), but that Einstein’s general theory of 1915 had given the value observed by
the British eclipse expedition. Soldner’s and Einstein’s contributions were deemed incommensurable