DOCS.
367,
368
FEBRUARY-MARCH
1912 269
367. To
Paul Ehrenfest
[Prague,
29 February
1912,
7:30
p.m.]
for
Ehrenfest,
Train
1102
III
class
Telegram
Must
go
Vienna
Change
Trubau[1]
Einstein
368. From Fritz Haber
Dahlem
(Berlin) Königin
Luisestr.
14,
8
March 1912
Prof. Dr. A. Einstein,
Chair
for
Theoretical
Physics,
German
University,
Prague
Dear
Mr.
Einstein:
The
whole
world
seems
to have
conspired
to
badger
me
with all kinds
of
nonscien-
tific business
these
last few
days,
and
to
delay my
enjoyment
of
your
fundamentally
important paper,
which
you
sent
me
in
page
proof.[1]
In
my
opinion
it
was a
fundamental
idea
on
your
part
to
introduce the
concept
of
a coupling
between radiation and
chemical
conversion.
The idea that there
are
substances
that emit radiant
energy
hv for each
independent particle upon
their
appearance,
and
consume
it
upon
their
disappearance
(v
proper frequency
of the
appearing
and
disappearing substance)
has
the
same
significance as
Faraday's
idea that
the
appearance
and
disappearance
of
structures
that
undergo
conversion
at
electrodes
are
accompanied
by
the
consumption
and,
respectively,
release
of
one
and the
same
amount
of electrochemical
charge per equivalent.[2]
Unquestionably,
these
two ideas
are
ultimately
connected, in
that the
charge is
the
determining
factor
with
Faraday
and the
radiation of the electron
with
you,
though
I
would
not venture
to
discuss the nature
of
this
connection
at
present.
You
introduced
a simplification
into the derivation
in
that
you
assumed that
only one
of
the reactants
releases
or
emits
radiation
of its
proper
frequency
in
a
reversible
way
at its formation
or,
respectively,
its
disappearance.
Permit
me
to
express my
opinion
on
how
the
thing
should be
treated
in the
case
when
this
property
inheres in all the
reactants.
If
my
arguments
are
correct,
then
it suffices
to
forgo
this
simplification
in
order
to trace back
the heat of
reaction, which in
your
treatment
still
appears
as
an
independent
thermal
constant
of
the
process,
to the
proper frequencies
of the structures
participating
in
the
reaction,
which
we
will
assume
to
be
strictly
monochromatic,
and
to
the radiation
constant h. Since for the
purpose
of
this
argument
of
mine it
is
in
no
way
important to
know
the
dependence
of
the
equilibrium
on
radiation
of
arbitrary
density,
in
the
argument
that
follows
I
will
forgo
the
assumption
that
the
temperature
of the
Previous Page Next Page