DOCUMENT 194 FEBRUARY 1916 265
AKSX
(GyGöU,
Cod. Ms. D.
Hilbert
92b).
[13
095].
Obscured.
[1]Dated by
Helen Dukas: “Postkarte
vom
18.
II. 1916
aus
Berlin.”
[2]Presumably
a
reference
to
Hilbert’s
receptivity
to
a
discussion of
bringing
Erwin
Freundlich
to
Göttingen
(see
the
following
note).
[3]In
his efforts to free
Freundlich of
routine tasks and allow him to devote his efforts to the obser-
vational
proof
of
general relativity,
Einstein
had,
a
year earlier,
discussed
a
two-track
strategy
with
Max Planck. The first
was
to
give
Freundlich
greater
research
independence
within the
Royal
Prus-
sian
Observatory,
the
second,
on
Planck’s
advice,
to find
him
an
academic
position (see
Docs. 53
and
54).
The affair under discussion follows from Einstein’s
pursuit
of
the second
track,
in
which
Hilbert
apparently
served
as
mediator
between
Einstein and
Johannes
Franz Hartmann
(1865-1936),
Pro-
fessor
of
Astronomy
at the
University
of
Göttingen
and
Director of
its
Observatory.
As
Planck had
pointed
out
a year earlier,
Freundlich should seek
an
academic
position
after
completing a
Habilita-
tion in theoretical
astronomy (see
Doc.
54),
a
first
step,
for
which attachment to
a
university
was a
prerequisite.
Hartmann
played
a
natural role
as
mentor
in this
strategy,
as
his
observatory
in
Göttingen
was
close
enough
to
Berlin
for Einstein
to maintain
personal supervision over
Freundlich’s work
(see
Doc.
207).
This
supervision
would have
proven impossible
if
Einstein had taken the
position
at the
University
of
Vienna.
In mid-November
1915,
a
commission
had
unanimously
proposed
Marian
von
Smoluchowski
as
successor
to Friedrich Hasenöhrl (1874-1915),
Professor of
Physics
at the
University
of
Vienna,
but
Smoluchowski did not receive
an
absolute
majority
of
faculty votes
a
month later. In
January, an
expanded
commission
suggested
the additional candidacies
of
Einstein,
Max
von
Laue,
and Arnold
Sommerfeld,
and all three
expressed
their
interest
by
the
beginning
of
February.
Though
Einstein
was
nominated
primo
loco in the
faculty meeting
of
11
March
(see
memorandum
of Edmund
Hauler,
Prodekan, 19
March
1916, AVSa,
Phil. Dekanat
Wien,
8844/1916),
his
name appears
to
have
been
withdrawn from consideration
soon
after: in
a
letter of recommendation
of
late
May,
Max
Planck
only
discusses
the candidacies
of
Laue,
Sommerfeld,
and Smoluchowski
(see
Max Planck
to
Ludwig
Cwiklinski,
28
May
1916, AVSa,
Phil. Dekanat
Wien, 22846/1916).
[4]The
possible
observation
of the deflection
of
light passing by
Jupiter
is discussed in Doc. 181.
[5]See
Doc.
186,
note
6,
for
more
on
Freundlich’s
determination of
the redshift
of
the light
of
fixed
stars.
194. To
Karl Schwarzschild
[Berlin, 19 February
1916]
Sehr
geehrter
Herr
Kollege!
Leider
habe ich
wegen
vieler
Arbeit Ihren früheren
Brief[1]
noch nicht
beantwor-
ten können. Die
dort behandelten
Spezialfalle erregten
mein Interesse auch in min-
der
hohem
Grade. Ihre
neue Mitteilung
aber finde ich sehr interessant. Ich habe
Ihre
Rechnung bestätigt gefunden.
Meine
diesbezügliche Bemerkung
in
der
Arbeit
von
4. November
gilt gemäss
der
neuen
Festsetzung
J^g
= 1
nicht
mehr,
wie
mir
schon bekannt
war.[2]
Seitdem habe ich
ja
den Newton’schen Fall nach
der
endgül-
tigen
Theorie
ja
anders
behandelt.-[3]
Es
gibt
also keine
Gravitationswellen,
wel-
che Lichtwellen
analog
wären. Es
hängt
dies
übrigens
wohl auch mit
der
Einseitig-
keit des Vorzeichens des Skalars T
zusammen.
(Nichtexistenz
des
"Dipols“).[4]
Herzlichen Gruss
und besten
Dank für die
interessente
Mitteilung.
Ihr
A. Einstein.
AKS
(GyGöU,
Cod. Ms. K.
Schwarzschild
Briefe 193,9).
[81
811].
The
postcard
is
addressed
“Herrn
Prof. Dr. Schwarzschild Lt. d.
Landwehr
b.
Oberkommando d. 5. Armee
b.
General d.
Fussartillerie