2 5 4 D O C U M E N T 2 5 9 M A Y 1 9 2 4
3) Definitive abandonment of strict causality seems intolerable to me.
4) One would almost be inclined also to demand an acoustic (elastic) virtual ra-
diation field for solid bodies, since it’s not easy to believe that quantum mechanics
necessarily needs an electric theory of matter as a foundation.
5) The process of normal dispersion (not for the eigenfrequency of the mole-
cule), which is in fact primarily decisive for the optical behavior of bodies, fits bad-
ly into this scheme because virtual radiation shouldn’t again have virtual radiation
as a direct consequence, but rather only probabilities for the transition between mo-
lecular states. This is, of course, just an “architectural” objection.
Cordial regards to you and yours, and to Mr. De
Ridder,[11]
yours,
Einstein.
How are all of you going to stand it for so long without
Galinka?[12]
I saw V.
Ardenne[13]
(in
Maarn[14]
and Utrecht). He is a nice person but I do understand your
reservations (not a “chap, through and through,” somewhat feminine
Now I probably am going into the League of Nations commission. I also see that
my earlier action was not the right
way.[15]