D O C U M E N T 3 1 6 N O V E M B E R 1 9 2 8 3 0 7 b) A higher probability of proportionality between the motion of B and the current in C, since the oscillations will remain in the neighborhood of their “zero position.” Point of concern: The midpoint posi- tion of B is unstable, owing to the change of sign at that position. The zero point of the oscillations might switch suddenly back and forth be- tween x – and y. With best regards, your R. Goldschmidt [1] Caption: “joint” “spring-loaded clamping.” [3] Caption: “elastic section” “cross section” “as inelastic as possible” [4] Caption: “path” “ ” “zero position.” 316. To Chaim Herman Müntz [Gatow,] 16 November 1928 Dear Mr. Müntz, It is truly an extraordinarily remarkable result that in the centrally symmetric gravitational problem, exactly the Schwarzschild solution emerges, in spite of the fact that the equations would appear to have practically nothing to do with the ear- lier ones.[1] I have now unearthed something still more remarkable. You know that the field equations in first approximation in the case of the appearance of a nonsymmetric h (electromagnetic field?), produce an indeterminacy in that when the nonsymmetric parts of h are not produced, then the are the nonsymmetric parts of the , then it follows from the field equations in first approximation, which can be written as (I) linear in the a much-too-weak determination of the . This is connected to the fact that for our choice of the Hamilton function except for the H also valid for other besides the identity , [4] force l h x H – 0 = H h i k h i k ik h i k + = l x ------- - l x --------- - l x --------- - l x ---------- + + 0 = x 2 x H – 0