D O C U M E N T S 2 8 7 , 2 8 9 J U L Y 1 9 2 2 2 2 3 287. From Richard B. Haldane Westminster, 28 Queen Anne’s Gate, 14 July 1922 Highly esteemed and dear Professor, It pleased me very much to receive your letter of the 3rd of this month.[1] And also that you were so kind to my nephew, who is now in Göttingen.[2] Weyl writes me that he has a philosophical supplement to his book in hand. It will be interesting to see whether he has shed some light on the difficult problem of the significance of his conception.[3] With best regards to your gracious wife, most devotedly yours, Haldane 288. From Gerhard Kowalewski[1] Dresden, 14 July 1922 [Not selected for translation.] 289. To George Jaffé Berlin, 15 July 1922 Dear Colleague, Through mere transformations, of course, nothing substantially new is gained, because only the quantity determines the behavior of the clocks and measuring rods. You can also see that the spatially infinite does not become a singularity, e.g., from the fact that the quantity that defines the behavior of the clocks does not become singular but has the limit C.[1] This argument is perhaps more cogent than observations about the inertia of masses, because in order to assess them one has to put the equation of motion into Newtonian form, which necessarily adds a certain ds g00