3 4 8 D O C . 4 5 A N T I - R E L AT I V I T Y C O M PA N Y
Published in Berliner Tageblatt, 27 August 1920, Morning Edition, pp. [1–2].
[1]For background on the events that precipitated this article, see the editorial note, “Einstein’s
Encounters with German Anti-Relativists,” pp. 101–113). See also Fölsing 1993, pp. 520–529. In
response to Paul Ehrenfest’s criticism of this document (Paul Ehrenfest to Einstein, 2 September
1920), and his speculation that Einstein might not have written it himself, Einstein informed him that
“I wrote it one morning in one stroke, completely on my own” (“Ich habe ihn ganz unbeeinflusst eines
Vormittags in einem Zuge hingeschrieben.” Einstein to Paul Ehrenfest, before 10 September 1920).
Ehrenfest had expressed his consternation also to Lorentz (Paul Ehrenfest to Hendrik A. Lorentz, 2
September 1920, NeLR, Archief H. A. Lorentz).
[2]The Arbeitsgemeinschaft deutscher Naturforscher zur Erhaltung reiner Wissenschaft e. V. was
an unregistered front organization founded by Paul Weyland (see Kleinert 1993 and Goenner 1993,
pp. 120–123).
[3]The event was advertised in advance in Weyland 1920a and subsequently reported in detail in
several newspapers, including Berliner Tageblatt, Vossische Zeitung, Vorwärts, and 8-Uhr Abendblatt
(portions were reprinted in Weyland 1920b). Weyland’s lecture was published in Weyland 1920b, pp.
10–20; Gehrcke’s appeared as Gehrcke 1920, which was disseminated at the time of the meeting. Ein-
stein sat quietly in a box seat, well within earshot of a voice that barked out: “One ought to seize this
Jew by the gullet” (“man sollte diesem Juden an die Gurgel fahren.” Die Umschau 24 [1920]: 554).
According to another account, “at the close of the meeting on Tuesday some students who were near
Einstein, . . . said in a very loud voice, among other things: ‘one really ought to jump at the gullet of
this Jewish swine’”(“sogar Studenten nach Schluß der Versammlung am Dienstag in der Nähe von
Professor Einstein, . . . u. a. ganz laut sagten: ‘Diesem Saujuden müßte man eigentlich an die Gurgel
springen.’” Vossische Zeitung 29 August 1920, Morning Edition, Supplement 4, p. 1).
Others present included Walther Nernst, Max von Laue, and Ilse Einstein (Vossische Zeitung, re-
printed in Weyland 1920b, p. 6; Max von Laue to Arnold Sommerfeld, 25 August 1920 [GyMDM,
Nachlass Sommerfeld, 1977-28/A,197(5)]).
[4]The inclusion of Larmor’s name seems unjustified; see Hentschel 1998, pp. 496–500, for Lar-
mor’s reservations about general relativity.
[5]See his anti-relativistic booklet, Lenard 1918 and the critical remarks he added in Lenard 1920.
[6]Einstein here failed to mention his response to Lenard’s criticisms in Einstein 1918k (Doc. 13).
[7]This passage reads: “Vor hochtönenden Phrasen und Worten bekomme ich eine Gänsehaut,
mögen sie von sonst etwas oder von Relativitätstheorie handeln. Ich habe mich oft lustig gemacht
über Ergüsse, die nun zuguterletzt mir aufs Konto gesetzt werden. Uebrigens lasse ich den Herren von
der G.m.b.H. gerne das Vergnügen.”
[8]Weyland railed against Einstein mainly for “advertising relativity,” repeating charges already
leveled much earlier by Gehrcke. See the editorial note, “Einstein’s Encounters with German Anti-
Relativists,” pp. 101–113.
[9]In response to Einstein’s charges, Gehrcke vehemently denied that he had any motives other than
the clarification of scientific issues: “I refuse to pursue the path of Einstein’s impertinent personal
polemics against me; a response to his comments, insofar as they are objective, will be given else-
where. . . . I would only like to remark that Einstein will find it difficult to provide proof of a connec-
tion between the substantive arguments I have brought against the theory of relativity over the years
and any political or personal motivations” (“Den hier von Einstein mir gegenüber eingeschlagenen
Weg der unsachlichen persönlichen Polemik lehne ich ab zu verfolgen; eine Antwort auf die Ausfüh-
rungen Einsteins, soweit sie sachlich sind, wird an anderer Stelle erteilt werden. . . . Ich möchte nur
bemerken, daß es Einstein schwer fallen dürfte, den Beweis dafür anzutreten, daß ein Zusammenhang
zwischen meinen jahrelangen, sachlichen Widersprüchen gegen die Relativitätstheorie mit poli-
tischen und persönlichen Beweggründen besteht.” Deutsche Zeitung, 1 September 1920).
[10]On Gehrcke’s many attempts to interpret the clock paradox as the weak point of the special the-
ory of relativity, see the editorial note, “Einstein’s Encounters with German Anti-Relativists,” pp.
101–113. Einstein’s response to Gehrcke in Einstein 1918k (Doc. 13) led only to a hardening of his
views. Gehrcke had already argued that Minkowski’s space-time geometry led to solipsism in
Gehrcke 1914, p. 39.
[11]This hypothesis had been advanced in Seeliger 1906; see Earman and Janssen 1993 for histor-