DOC.
119
SEPTEMBER
1908 85
enclosing a
photograph
of
one
of
my radiograms[2]
from which
you
will
immediately
recognize
the
superiority
of
my
method,
i.e.,
if
you
have
seen
Kaufmann's
radiograms.
Kaufmann
has
a
great
many sources
of
error
in his
experimental setup,
and
I have
already
told him
about
one
of
them.
Already
the
asymmetry
that
I
discovered
in
the
two
branches of the
curve,
\
which should be
symmetrical according
to
the
theory
of
the
experimental setup, is
by
itself
sufficient
to
render the
claim to
precision
illusory.[3]
At
my suggestion,
Kaufmann measured the
asymmetry,
and
he
found
an
asymmetry
of
5% in
two
of
6
curves!
That
is
almost
what
the difference in the
theory
that
has to be
tested
comes
to.
There
are,
in addition,
many
other
oversights,
etc.[4]
As
regards
the
ratio of
e
to
m0,
the
theory applied
in the
calculation
of
the
velocity,
first
by
Schuster[5]
Ģ
and
then
by
Kaufmann
and
Simon,
is
wrong,
and
the results for
-
are
completely
m0
illusory.
The
term
for the
energy
of
the
Roentgen
rays
is
missing
from
the
right-hand
side
of
the
equation[8] eV=1~2
my2.
For
just
as
y-rays
emanate
from
radium
salts,
they
also emanate from
wherever
/3-rays
are being
produced,
and thus also from
the cathode
and its
vicinity,
in
short
from
wherever electrons
are
being
accelerated.[9]
The
omission
c of
the
Roentgen
energy
makes
u,
and thus also
-,
too
large.
I
recently
learned of
m0
M
exceedingly
precise measurements
by
Schuster's method that
yielded
1.78
·
10
.
These
measurements
will
probably
be
published
soon.[10] Shortly
I
am
myself going
to
determine
experimentally
the
percentage
of
the
Roentgen-ray energy
and correct
accordingly
the
values for
-
yielded
by
the old
Schuster method.
m0
Concerning
your
arguments
about the
concept
of
force,
I
understand
very
well
that
you
prefer to sidestep
this
concept
completely.
But the
debate
with Mr.
Cunningham
forces
me
to
get
into this
question.[11]
In
fact,
one can
base
oneself
completely
on
the
theory
of
relativity
and
ask,
for the
purpose
of
experimental investigation,
what
force acts
upon
an
electron that
moves
in
a
uniform
magnetic
field H, and
then make
the
mu
2
provisional
assumption,
=
eHu sin
a,
where,
according
to
your theory
and
Lorentz's
theory,
one
has
to
set
m
=
m0(
1-/32)
2. Now, Cunningham
claims
that
the
TT
force
is
ĢHu
sin
a
,
which
is
exactly
the
same
force
that
I
have
derived
from
my
own
1
-ß2cos2a
relativity
principle,[13]
which I
myself
have
just
disproved by
experiment. I
would
now
like