D O C U M E N T S 3 6 , 3 7 M A Y 1 9 2 3 3 9
36. From Hermann Weyl
[Zurich, 22 May 1923]
Dear Colleague,
Don’t be startled; here comes another
First: Born informs me that
he can strike my criticism in the article intended for the Physik[alische]
—Then: Neither do your laws change if one substitutes , with
, ; they entail no intrinsic difference between pos. and neg. electricity.[3] It
is, of course, all the more questionable that the expression for the fundamental
magnitudes is sensitive to the sign of . The case in my theory is exactly the
I know of only one way out: presuming the as purely imaginary; this
would set the sign of the Maxwellian energy tensor right, at the same time! For my
theory, this would mean, according to the formula , that the path length
l remains absolutely unchanged at congr[uent] displ[acement] and only deviates
into the imaginary. This is a thought that has been plaguing me for a long time al-
ready.—The concurrence between both our theories is so striking that something
must be behind it; my hope has increased considerably that we shall agree. With
best regards, yours,
H. Weyl.
37. To Mileva Einstein-Maric
[Berlin,] 23 May [1923]
Dear Mileva,
In the next days, Fr 4,500 are going out to Albert Karr from Stockholm for you
for the down payment on the house.[1] As this must happen soon, I have to rely here
on your and your friends’ carefulness. The rest will be deposited under your name
in a bank in New York in Argentine, Swedish, and Danish dollar bonds, provided
you do not prevent by telegram the deposit being executed in your name. I did ev-
erything well and carefully. Do your business well, too!
With kind regards and kisses for the boys, yours,
skl ϕl
skl –ϕl
dl ldϕ –=
Previous Page Next Page