510 DOC. 18 DISCUSSION OF DOC. 16
Discussion
comments to
Einstein 1913c
(Doc. 17).
Published
in Physikalische
Zeitschrift
14
(1913):
1262-1266. Published
15
December
1913.
[1]Gustav
Mie
(1868-1957)
was
Professor
of
Physics
at the
University
of Greifswald.
[2]For
an
extensive
historical
study
of Nordström's work
and its
relationship to
that of Abra-
ham,
see
Isaksson
1985;
for
a
brief discussion
of Abraham's work
on
gravitational
theories
and his
controversy
with
Einstein,
see
the editorial
note,
"Einstein
on
Gravitation and Relativ-
ity:
The Static
Field,"
pp.
124-127.
[3]See
Nordström
1912,
1913b. For
a
discussion of the
source
term
of Nordström's
field
equations,
see
also Einstein 1913c
(Doc. 17),
p.
1254.
In
his lecture,
Einstein
presented only
the second
version of Nordström's
theory.
Mie later claimed that
he
had had
the first
version
in
mind
during
the discussion
(see
Mie 1914b,
pp.
174-175).
[4]For
Mie's
treatment
of
gravitation,
see
Mie
1913,
pp.
25-65. For
a
later
account
of his
theory, see
Pauli
1921, sec.
64.
[5]See Mie
1912a, 1912b, 1913.
[6]See
Mie
1913,
p.
49. In
a
contemporary
letter Einstein
commented
on
Mie's
theory:
"[It]
is
fantastic and has
in
my opinion
a
negligibly
small
intrinsic
probability"
("...
ist
phantastisch
und hat meiner
Meinung
nach eine verschwindend kleine
innere Wahrscheinlichkeit." Einstein
to
Erwin
Freundlich,
mid-August
1913
[Vol.
5,
Doc.
468]).
[7]In
a contemporary
letter Einstein characterized Abraham's
theory as
"inconsistent from
the invariant theoretical
point
of view"
("vom
invariantentheoretischen
Standpunkt
inkonse-
quent."
Einstein
to
Erwin
Freundlich,
mid-August
1913
[Vol.
5,
Doc.
468]).
[8]See
Mie
1914a,
1914b,
and Einstein 1914e
(Doc.
25)
for Einstein's
reply
to
Mie's
criticism.
[9]See
Einstein 1913c
(Doc.
17), §6.
[10]Eduard Riecke
(1845-1915)
was
Professor of Theoretical
Physics
at
the
University
of
Göttingen
and Director of the Division of
Experimental Physics at
its
Physics
Institute.
[11]See, e.g.,
Faraday
1857 for Michael
Faraday's
speculations
on
the
nature
of
gravity.
[12]Friedrich
Hasenöhrl
(1874-1915)
was
Professor of
Physics
at
the
University
of Vienna.
[13]Einstein
corresponded
about
this
question with, among others,
the
Berlin
astronomer
Erwin Freundlich
(see
Einstein
to
Erwin
Freundlich,
1
September
1911
[Vol.
5,
Doc.
281],
and
later
correspondence)
and the
American
astronomer George
Hale
(see
Einstein
to
George
Hale,
14
October
1913
[Vol.
5,
Doc.
477]).
Freundlich seemed
initially
convinced that
even
daylight
observations would
be possible (see
Einstein to
Heinrich
Zangger,
20
September 1911
[Vol.
5,
Doc.
286]
and Einstein
to
Erwin
Freundlich,
before
26
August
1913
[Vol. 5,
Doc.
472]).
Later,
George
Hale
discouraged
Einstein from
pursuing
this
possibility
and recommended
the
eclipse
method
(see
George
Hale
to Einstein, 8
November
1913
[Vol.
5,
Doc.
483]).
For
a
historical
account,
see
Earman and
Glymour
1980a.
[14]Gustav
Jäger
(1888-1938)
was
Professor of
Physics at
the
Technical
University
of
Vienna.
[15]For
the
dependence
of
the
deflection of
a
light ray
on
the
distance from the
gravitating
body,
see
Einstein 1911h
(Vol. 3,
Doc.
23),
p.
908.
Einstein earlier
expressed
his
concern
that
refraction
in
the solar
atmosphere might
influence the
measurements
(see
Einstein
to
Erwin
Freundlich,
1
September
1911
[Vol. 5,
Doc.
281];
see
also
W. H.
Julius
to Einstein, 27 Sep-
tember
1911
[Vol. 5,
Doc.
289],
and Max Laue
to Einstein, 27
December
1911
[Vol. 5,
Doc.
333],
for
expressions
of similar
concern).
[16]Gyözö
Zemplen
(1879-1916)
was
Professor of Theoretical
Physics
at
the Technical Uni-
versity
of
Budapest.
[17]See
Eötvös
1891,
Hess
1891,
and
Eötvös
1910.
[18]Hans
Reißner
(1874-1967)
was
Professor of Mechanics
at
the Technical
University
of
Aachen.
[19]Einstein later
published
a more
complete answer to
Reißner's
question (see
Einstein 1914c
[Doc. 24]).
[20]See
Abraham
1912g.
Previous Page Next Page