Abstract
In March of 1933, when Albert and Elsa left Caltech after their third sojourn abroad, they crossed the Atlantic and settled temporarily in Belgium, where he had a friendship with the King and Queen. The Einsteins lived in a small seaside town on the North Sea about 70 miles from Brussels, and were protected by security guards because the Nazis had put a price on his head. The Nazis emptied his bank account and ransacked his Berlin apartment several times, looting rugs, paintings, books, and other sundry items. Fortunately a large collection of Einstein’s scientific and personal papers were saved, taken to the French embassy, and smuggled out of the country by diplomatic pouch. How this happened, and which of Elsa’s daughters was responsible for this act – Margot and her husband, Dimitri Marianoff, or Ilse and her husband, Rudolf Kayser – is dependent on what source you read. The Nazi’s also raided Einstein’s summer cottage looking for weapons; they confiscated a breadknife.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Marianoff [135] says they burned his books, p. 133.
- 2.
Kayser was the anonymous author of a biography of Einstein under the pseudonym, Anton Reiser (see Reiser [171]). Marianoff later also wrote a book on Einstein (Marianoff [135]).
- 3.
Marianoff [135] reports that on learning of the raid, he phoned Margot, directing her to take Einstein’s papers to the French embassy (pp. 141–144). Isaacson [109], reports the story as true (p. 404), although he also says that Einstein “denounced” Marianoff’s book (p. 559). Brian [15] reports that Dukas called Marianoff’s book unreliable, although she conceded that many incidents were quite correct (p. 339). Hence, Brian repeats Marianoff’s account of the Nazi raid in his book. Fölsing [65], however, credits Ilse and Kayser for saving the papers, library, and even shipping furniture to the United States (p. 666). Neffe [149], p. 287, echoes this, but does not cite a source. Pais [162] also credits Kayser for saving the papers (p. 528). Parker [164] says Ilse was in the apartment when the Nazis ransacked the place (Marianoff says Margot was there) and she was “scared out of her wits”; Parker thus credits Ilse and Kayser as saving the papers – but he provides on documentation (p. 234). Levenson [132] credits Margot for sending Einstein’s important documents to the French embassy, but he too cites no source (p. 419). It appears that many secondary sources are merely copying each other.
- 4.
The breadknife story is reported by Marianoff (p. 144).
- 5.
Farrell [61], pp. 118–119. Their last meeting took place in Princeton in 1935, where Lemaître was lecturing for a semester at the Institute, but unfortunately there seems to be no documentation of their interaction. Farrell, p. 119.
- 6.
One was the previously mentioned Herbert Spencer Lecture delivered at Oxford on June 10, 1933, reprinted in Einstein [47], pp. 270–276. Also, the lecture, “Notes on the Origin of the General Theory of Relativity,” was delivered at the University of Glasgow, June 20, 1933, reprinted on pp. 285–290.
- 7.
- 8.
Maja died there in 1951. Helen Dukas outlived Einstein (d. 1955), remaining in the house until her death in 1982. Margot, who inherited the house, died in 1986. She also received $20,000 from Einstein’s will, as did Dukas, which was more than his sons’ inheritance (Hans received $10,000 and Eduard $15,000). Neffe [149], p. 191; Michelmore [141], p. 258.
- 9.
Einstein [55] [1948], pp. 105–107 (letter to Solovine, November 25, 1948); Isaacson, p. 518.
- 10.
This is relentlessly witnessed by historians as the volumes of the Einstein Papers are sporadically published. I, at least, find the correspondence overwhelming.
- 11.
- 12.
At least, there is a general consensus it was these three. Hoffmann [97], pp. 46–47, names these three in Berlin (reproducing the images of Faraday and Maxwell on p. 46) but says the image of Newton was lost in the Nazi raid of 1933. In Sugimoto [194], p. 102, there is a photo of Einstein sitting in his Berlin study with Newton’s picture clearly on the wall, and which is reproduced larger on the same page. The same photo is in Renn (ed.), [172], Volume 1, p. 421. Marianoff [135], p. 1, first mentions “a large framed picture of Michael Faraday” in the Berlin apartment Library; then, on page 205, he says that in Einstein’s study in Princeton there were three pictures that came from Germany with the furniture: Newton, Maxwell, and Faraday, thus contradicting Hoffman. He also said there were no other pictures in the room. Reiser [171], pp. 193–194, says the Berlin study had pictures of Faraday, Maxwell, and Schopenhauer, the latter being one of Einstein’s favorite philosophers, along with Kant, Hume, and Spinoza. Bucky [22], pp. 51–52, also names these three in Berlin. Isaacson [109], p. 438 (but with no citation), says that at Princeton there were pictures of Newton, Faraday, Maxwell, and later Gandhi; whereas Bucky [22], p. 42, says there were only pictures of Faraday, Maxwell, and Gandhi in Princeton, which seems to support Hoffmann on the missing Newton picture. Clark [26], p. 643, names the same three, without a citation. Further evidence is supplied by the physicist, R. S. Shankland [182], pp. 54 and 57, who visited Einstein in his study in 1952 and 1954, and mentions only pictures of Maxwell and Faraday, and science historian I. B. Cohen [27], p. 69, who visited Einstein two week before he died, and mentions the same two pictures. These last reports may not necessarily eliminate the picture of Gandhi, since as science historians they may only have been interested in scientists on the wall.
- 13.
For a brief overview see Highfield [93].
- 14.
Initially there were several unification attempts by Arthur Eddington, Theodor Kaluza (see below), and others, but eventually Einstein (with some collaborators, also below) was alone in the quest.
- 15.
This physicist was none other than a young J. Robert Oppenheimer, who later directed the scientific part of the Manhattan Project for building the bomb. The quotation is from a letter to his brother, Frank, in 1935, in Oppenheimer [160], pp.189–191. After the war Oppenheimer became the Director of the Institute (1947–1966) and developed an affable relationship with Einstein, declaring in a memoir: “Just being with him was wonderful.” Oppenheimer [159], p. 47.
- 16.
Pais [162], p. 330.
- 17.
The complex details of this story, and Klein’s interactions with Einstein, are found in Halpern [86].
- 18.
- 19.
Others included Bannesh Hoffmann (1906–1986), Leopold Infeld (1898–1968), Peter Bergmann (1915–2002), Valentin (Valya) Bargmann (1908–1989), Ernst G. Straus (1922–1983), and others. His last was a woman, Bruria Kaufman (1918–2010), an Israeli physicist. Many were part of the brain-drain from Germany. Interestingly, Bergmann wrote the first English textbook on general relativity. See especially the discussions among Hoffmann, Bergmann, Bargmann, and Strauss in Woolf [215], Section XI. Also see Renn (ed.), [172], Volume 2, p. 143, and Van Dongen [205], pp. 140–142 and 146–148.
- 20.
- 21.
Einstein Papers, Vol. 1, Doc. 100. Letter to Grossmann, 14 April, 1901. It should be pointed-out that the context of his stubbornness was not a scientific topic; rather, his lack of acquiring a job and his not giving up in trying to procure one.
- 22.
Einstein, “Relativistic Theory of the Non-Symmetric Field,” published as Appendix II, in the fifth edition (1956) of the Princeton lectures, The Meaning of Relativity, quotation on pp. 163–164. His preface to this edition is dated December 1954, and in it he notes that the paper was written “in collaboration with” his assistant, Bruria Kaufman, his last collaborator. For a recent and more detailed technical study of Einstein’s quest, see Van Dongen [205].
- 23.
Einstein requested there be no physical memorial to him; he wanted no grave, and that his ashes be scattered in an unknown place. His ashes were scattered by Otto Nathan, who was a close friend of Einstein and the sole executor of his will. They met when Nathan taught economics at Princeton University (1933–1935), and they remained life-long friends. Their friendship was based, in part, on their mutual leftist political views; in fact, Nathan was a harassed during the McCarthy witch hunt for such views. Most sources state that Nathan was responsible for scattering Einstein’s ashes in an unknown place. But Michelmore, 1962, said it was a nearby river (p. 262). As noted in my annotation to Michelmore’s book in my bibliography, the book was based in part on interviews with Einstein’s son, Hans, as well as Helen Dukas and Nathan, the two being the co-trustees of Einstein’s estate. The latter fact brings to mind another point that should be briefly made on their roles in blocking the publication of documents that revealed the darker side of Einstein. Using litigation, Dukas and Nathan repeatedly delayed publication of the Einstein Papers and other works revealing the less-heroic side of Einstein. Dukas died in 1982, and it is no accident that when Nathan died in 1987, later in the year the first volume of the Papers finally was published. For more on this see Stachel [192], pp. 95–103, and Highfield and Carter [94], pp. 243–285.
- 24.
At least the postulation of the neutrino took place. The measurement of its actual existence was not made until the mid-1950s. A short version of this story is in Topper [198], pp. 85–87.
- 25.
Holton [100], p. 166.
- 26.
The caption to the Time picture is bizarre. It reads: “Cosmoclast Einstein,” with the subtitle, “All matter is speed and flame.” The neologism “cosmoclast” is apparently a combination of cosmologist and iconoclast. The subtitle, presumably, is a cryptic reference to E = mc2 within the context of the bomb.
- 27.
For a recent account pointing to some involvement by Einstein, see Schweber [180], pp. 42–62, especially p. 51.
- 28.
Green [81], Introduction.
- 29.
Stachel [192], p. 385.
- 30.
It was not a minor contribution, either. In 1924–1925, in collaboration with the Indian physicist, Satyendra Nath Bose, they predicted something called the Bose-Einstein condensate (later experimentally found), employing, and accordingly introducing, what is called Bose-Einstein statistics.
- 31.
(1885–1962).
- 32.
Klein [117]. Klein, however, refers to it as a “dialogue.” See also, Brush [17], pp. 414–419. The literature on this is extensive.
- 33.
In addition to its application in physics, statistics was used in the social sciences, and in general to experimental error; think of the Gaussian distribution, or the so-called bell curve. Brush [17], pp. 399–403, emphasizes the rise of statistics in nineteenth physics, such as around the problem of irreversibility in thermodynamics.
- 34.
Brush [16], p. 92.
- 35.
Klein [118].
- 36.
Klein [118], p. 115.
- 37.
This nicely dovetails with Kuhn’s thesis, 1987.
- 38.
Ontology is derived from the Greek word on, meaning to be or to exist.
- 39.
The reader may wish to compare my approach to these methodological matters with that of Van Dongen [205], Chap. 2.
- 40.
Grundlage, in German.
- 41.
- 42.
Brush [21], p. 223 note 52 and p. 227.
- 43.
Klein [117], p. 13.
- 44.
This transpired mainly through a series of further experiments that confirmed the photon. The details, however, are beyond the scope of this book.
- 45.
Klein [117], pp. 4–6; Stachel [192], p. 379.
- 46.
der störente Dualismus, in German.
- 47.
Einstein [51] [1949], p. 35.
- 48.
(1892–1987).
- 49.
George Paget Thomson (1892–1975).
- 50.
Pais [162], pp. 436–437. De Broglie received a Noble Prize in 1929 and G. P. Thomson in 1937. There were other experiments confirming the wave nature of matter.
- 51.
Quoted in Pais [162], p. 443.
- 52.
Quoted in Pais [163], pp. 227–228.
- 53.
Bohr, in Schilpp (ed.) [10], pp. 205–206.
- 54.
Bohr, in Schilpp (ed.) [10], p. 210.
- 55.
Bohr, in Schilpp (ed.) [10], p. 218: “…ob der liebe Gott würfelt.” About the same time, in a letter to Max Born, December 4, 1926, he wrote a now-famous statement: “Quantum mechanics is certainly imposing. But an inner voice tells me that it is not yet the real thing. The theory says a lot, but does not really bring us any closer to the secrets of the ‘old one.’ I, at any rate, am convinced that He is not playing at dice.” In Einstein [56] [1926], p. 88, emphasis his.
- 56.
Sommerfeld, in Schilpp (ed.) [189], p. 103.
- 57.
I am using the quotation from Isaacson [109], pp. 388–389, who is quoting from the New York Times, April 25, 1929; cited in Isaacson, p. 617, note 9.
- 58.
It is of some relevance that Einstein’s son-in-law, Rudolf Kayser, who wrote a biography of Einstein (a.k.a. Reiser [171]), also wrote a book on Spinoza (see Kayser [114]), for which Einstein wrote the Introduction. In it Einstein discussed only the psycho-social world of Spinoza and compared it to the present post-Second World War situation, making no mention of philosophical or theological matters. I’m not sure what to make of this.
- 59.
Der wunde Punkt, in German.
- 60.
Letter to Georg Jaffe, January 19, 1954, quoted in Stachel [192], p. 390.
- 61.
Letter of 1944, in Einstein [56] [1944], p.146.
- 62.
Reprinted in, Einstein [47] [1936], pp. 290–323, quotation from pp. 315–316.
- 63.
Einstein [47] [1936], p. 318.
- 64.
In the late 1920s the terms quantum physics and quantum theory were often replaced by quantum mechanics, which usually referred to the transformation of the theory by Erwin Schrödinger, Werner Heisenberg, and others – needless to say, again, all this is outside the scope of this book on relativity.
- 65.
Bohr, in Schilpp (ed.) [10], p. 235.
- 66.
For example, if you search the phrase, “in quantum mechanics, we are not dealing with an arbitrary renunciation of a more detailed analysis of atomic phenomena,” on Google Books, you immediately find well over a hundred books quoting Bohr.
- 67.
Quoted in Fölsing [65], p. 705.
- 68.
Bohr, in Schilpp (ed.) [10], pp. 237–238.
- 69.
Letter to Born, 15 September, 1950, in Einstein [56] [1950], p. 185.
- 70.
In a letter to Born (March 18, 1948), Einstein wrote that he wished to meet with him again, because, he wrote: “I would enjoy picking your positivistic philosophical attitude to pieces myself.” Einstein [56] [1948], p. 160. It is true that Max Born made essential contributions the statistical interpretation of quantum physics. But that he held to the positivistic framework that Einstein accuses him of is debatable. Let me quote from a series of lectures Born delivered in 1948 (the same year as the above letter) where he discussed this very matter. Pointing out that “the question of reality cannot be avoided” in quantum physics, he confessed that he believed in “an external world which exists independently of us.” Almost pleading his case he used the phrase “let me cling” to this idea. His argument began by positing that physics is fundamentally a search for invariants, and used the example of the charge and mass of an electron at rest. These “invariants of observation” led him to “maintain that the particles are real,” and independent of our observation – “just a real,” he wrote, as “a grain of sand.” Born [13] [1948], pp. 103–105. I find these remarks exceedingly interesting.
- 71.
Brush [17], p. 420, notes that “it has taken some time for physicists and philosophers to realize that the position Einstein was defending was not merely classical determinism but, more significantly, common-sense realism. Most of us still find it hard to believe that the world has no real existence apart from ourselves….” Agreed!
- 72.
- 73.
As noted, I am avoiding details of quantum physics, by focusing on epistemology/ontology. But I do wish to note in passing the often deemed important paper published in 1935 that remains a source of much debate over the completeness of quantum physics. It was a collaboration among Einstein, Boris Podolsky, and Nathan Rosen. Einstein, et al. [58]. The argument is often referred to as the EPR paradox. There is extensive literature on this paper. In particular, the contemporary problem of what is called entanglement arose out of this paper; namely, the apparent ability of two subatomic particles to know where each one is forever after having interacted. I note in passing that Brush [17], p. 419 claims that Einstein, in fact, had little input to the paper (Einstein said Podolsky wrote most of it), and was less than satisfied with the argument. We do know that Einstein did not hold to the idea of entanglement, which he viewed as an extreme form of action-at-a-distance. In short, super-spooky.
- 74.
Quoted in Infeld [107], p. 110.
- 75.
Note the title: “On a Heuristic Point of View Concerning the Production and Transformation of Light.” Recall, also, in his letter to Habicht at the time, that he called the idea “revolutionary.”
- 76.
Cited in Pais [162], p. 443.
- 77.
- 78.
In quoting from Einstein’s eulogy to Ehrenfest in Chap. s8, I spoke of his tragic death. What Einstein did not speak of was this: The Ehrenfests had four children, the last, Vassily, had Down’s syndrome, which was so severe that he was institutionalized at several hospitals for most of his life, the last being in Amsterdam. Over time Vassily’s condition became a deeper burden on the family, emotionally and financially. In addition, Ehrenfest was prone to periods of severe depression, especially from about May 1931. There are some unanswered questions surrounding what happened on September 25, 1933, but what seems to have transpired is heartrending: Ehrenfest went to the institution in Amsterdam carrying a gun; he shot Vassily and then turned the gun on himself. See Jones [110], p. 285 and 311 note 54.
- 79.
Quoted in Pais [162], p. 462. Letter to Besso dated August 8, 1949. The reason, however, was not only his seemingly fruitless quest at unification but his objection to Bohr’s interpretation of quantum physics. As he wrote in 1948 to another old friend, Habicht: “I still work indefatigably at science but I have become an evil renegade who does not wish physics to be based on probabilities.” Quoted in Clark [26], p. 738.
- 80.
Einstein [56], p. 178. Letter the Born dated April 12, 1949.
References
Bohr, Niels. 1949. Discussion with Einstein on epistemological problems in atomic physics. In P.A. Schilpp (ed.), 1949, Volume I, 199–241.
Born, Max. 1949. Einstein’s statistical theories. In P.A. Schilpp (ed.), 1949, Volume I, 161–177.
Born, Max. 1964. Natural philosophy of cause and chance. New York: Dover. This is reprint of a series of lectures delivered at Oxford University in 1948.
Brian, Denis. 1996. Einstein: a life. New York: Wiley.
Brush, Stephen. 1979. Einstein and indeterminism. Journal of the Washington Academy of Science 69(3): 89–94.
Brush, Stephen. 1980. The chimerical cat: philosophy of quantum mechanics in historical perspective. Social Studies of Science 10: 393–447.
Brush, Stephen. 2007. How ideas became knowledge: the light-quantum hypothesis 1905–1935. Historical Studies in the Physical and Biological Sciences 37(2): 205–246.
Bucky, Peter A. 1992. The private Albert Einstein. Kansas City: Andrews and McMeel.
Clark, Ronald W. 1971. Einstein: the life and times. New York: Avon Books.
Cohen, I. Bernard. 1955. An interview with Einstein. Scientific American 193(1): 68–73 (July). This interview was conducted two weeks before Einstein died.
Einstein, Albert. 1954. Ideas and opinions (trans and revisions by Sonja Bargmann.) New York: Bonanza Books. Based, in part, on Mein Weltbild. Edited by Carl Seelig, and others (Amsterdam: Querido Verlag, 1934); plus a further edition by Seelig published in Switzerland in 1953, and other sources, such as Out of My Later Years (1950), cited above. Seelig’s 1934 German edition was translated by Alan Harris as The World As I See It (but recent editions, see above, leave-out the scientific essays). See 1934, above, for translations of some of the scientific articles. Many of the essays in Ideas and Opinions do not cite original sources. According to Schilpp (ed.), 1949, Volume II, p.737, Seelig “gives no clue as to where items were originally published; some may never have appeared in print previously.”
Einstein, Albert. 1979. Autobiographical Notes. Translated and edited by Paul A. Schilpp. La Salle & Chicago: Open Court Publishing. This is the corrected version of the original 1947 German manuscript, first published in 1949. The uncorrected version is the more accessible one: see Albert Einstein: Philosopher-Scientist. Two Volumes. Edited by Paul A. Schilpp. New York: Harper & Row, 1949, Vol. I, 3–95. The latter book is cited separately below under Schilpp (ed.), 1979.
Einstein, Albert. 1987 +. The collected papers of Albert Einstein. Princeton: Princeton University Press. As I write this, the series has been published through Volume 12 (to 1921). Each document is cited in the text as: Einstein Papers, Vol. #, Doc. #.
Einstein, Albert. 2005. The Born-Einstein letters: friendship, politics and physics in uncertain times (trans: Irene Born.). New York: Macmillan. This is a collection of correspondence between Einstein and Max and Hedwig Born from 1916 to 1955, with commentaries by Max Born.
Einstein, Albert, B. Podolsky, and N. Rosen. 1935. “Can quantum-mechanical description of physical reality be considered complete. Physical Review 47: 777–780. The paper is reprinted, along with Bohr’s rebuttal, in Physical Reality: Philosophical Essays on Twentieth-Century Physics. Edited by Stephen Toulmin. New York: Harper Torchbooks, 1970, 122–130. Bohr’s essay is on pp. 130–142. Bohr’s paper, with the identical title, was also published in the Physical Review 48 (1935): 696–702.
Farrell, John. 2005. The day without yesterday: lemaître, Einstein, and the birth of modern cosmology. New York: Thunder’s Mouth Press.
Fölsing, Albrecht. 1997. Albert Einstein: a biography (trans: Ewald Osers.). New York: Viking. Originally published in German in 1993.
Frank, Philipp. 1947. Einstein: his life and times (Trans: George Rosen.). Edited and revised by Shuichi Kusaka. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.
Green, Jim (ed.). 2003. Albert Einstein. Melbourne/New York: Ocean Press. From the series, Rebel Lives, this book consists of a short introduction, followed by excerpts from his writings on mainly social and political topics.
Halpern, Paul. 2007. Klein, Einstein, and five dimensional unification. Physics in Perspective 9: 390–405.
Highfield, Roger. 2005. Einstein’s women. In Renn (ed.), 2005, below, Volume I, 242–263.
Highfield, Roger, and Paul, Carter. 1993. The private lives of Albert Einstein. London/Boston: Faber & Faber. Written by two journals, this is certainly the most muckraking account of Einstein’s personal life. Although they often take gossip as fact, much of their interpretation of real documentation is reasonable and persuasive.
Hoffmann, Banesh. 1972. Albert Einstein: creator and rebel. New York: New American Library.
Holton, Gerald. 1996. Einstein, history, and other passions: the rebellion against science at the end of the twentieth century. Reading: Addison-Wesley.
Infeld, Leopold. 1955. Albert Einstein: his work and influence on our world. Revised edition. New York: Scribner’s Sons. The first edition was published in 1950. The revised edition is not dated, but its starts by mentioning Einstein’s death in 1955. Hence I have chosen that date.
Isaacson, Walter. 2007. Einstein: his life and universe. New York: Simon & Schuster.
Jones, Sheilla. 2008. The quantum ten: a story of passion, tragedy, ambition, and science. Toronto: Thomas Allen.
Kayser, Rudolf. 1946. Spinoza: portrait of a spiritual hero. Introduction by Albert Einstein. (trans: Amy Allen, and Maxim Newmark.). New York: Philosophical Library. See Reiser, 1930.
Klein, Martin J. 1970a. Paul Ehrenfest: volume I: the making of a theoretical physicist. New York/Amsterdam: North-Holland. Klein died before completing volume two. Sheilla Jones (Jones, 2008) told me that in speaking with Klein on why the second volume was never written, he implied that he was psychologically blocked because of having to confront Ehrenfest’s suicide and murder of his son.
Klein, Martin. 1975. Einstein on scientific revolutions. Vistas in Astronomy 17: 113–120.
Levenson, Thomas. 2003. Einstein in Berlin. New York: Bantam Books.
Marianoff, Dimitri, and Palma Wayne. 1944. Einstein: an intimate study of a great man. New York: Doubleday, Doran, and Co. Marianoff was Einstein’s son-in-law, married to Elsa’s daughter, Margot, but later divorced.
Michelmore, Peter. 1962. Einstein: profile of the man. New York: Dodd, Mead & Co. Michelmore draws heavily on interviews with Einstein’s son, Hans, as well as Helen Dukas and Otto Nathan, who were the trustees of Einstein’s estate.
Neffe, Jürgen. 2007. Einstein: a biography. (trans: Shelley Frisch) from the 2005 German edition. New York: Farrar, Straus, & Giroux.
Oppenheimer, J. Robert. 1965. On Albert Einstein. In A. P. French (ed.), 1979, above, 44–49.
Oppenheimer, J. Robert. 1980. Robert oppenheimer: letters and recollections, ed. A.K.Smith, and C. Weiner. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Pais, Abraham. 1982. “Subtle is the Lord…”: the science and the life of Albert Einstein. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Pais, Abraham. 1991. Niels Bohr’s times: in physics, philosophy, and polity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Parker, Barry. 2003. Einstein: the passions of a scientist. New York: Prometheus Books.
Petersen, Aage. 1963. The philosophy of Niels Bohr. The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists 19(7): 8–14.
Reiser, Anton. 1930. Albert Einstein: a biographical portrait. New York: Albert & Charles Boni. The author’s name is a pseudonym for Rudolf Kayser, Einstein’s son-in-law, married to Elsa’s daughter, Ilse. See Keyser, 1946.
Renn, Jürgen (ed.). 2005. Albert Einstein, chief engineer of the universe. Volume I. One hundred authors for Einstein; Volume II. Einstein’s life and work in context; Volume III. Documents of a life’s pathway. Weinheim: Wiley-Vch Verlag.
Schweber, Silvan S. 2008. Einstein and oppenheimer: the meaning of genius. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Shankland, R.S. 1963. Conversations with Albert Einstein. American Journal of Physics 31: 47–57.
Sommerfeld, Arnold. 1949. To Albert Einstein’s seventieth birthday. In Schilpp (ed.), 1949, above, Volume 1, 99–105.
Stachel, John. 2002. Einstein from ‘B’ to ‘Z’. Boston/Basel/Berlin: Birkhäuser. This is Volume Nine in the Einstein Studies series.
Sugimoto, Kenji. 1989. Albert Einstein: A Photographic Biography (translated from the German by Barbara Harshav.). New York: Schocken Books.
Topper, David R. 2007. Quirky sides of scientists: true tales of ingenuity and error in physics and astronomy. New York: Springer.
Van Dongen, Jeroen. 2010. Einstein’s unification. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Woolf, Harry (ed.). 1980. Some strangeness in the proportion: a centennial symposium to celebrate the achievement of Albert Einstein. Reading: Addison-Wesley. See especially Section XI: Working with Einstein, 473–489.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media New York
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Topper, D.R. (2013). The Quest…and the Quarrel Over Quanta. In: How Einstein Created Relativity out of Physics and Astronomy. Astrophysics and Space Science Library, vol 394. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-4782-5_28
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-4782-5_28
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY
Print ISBN: 978-1-4614-4781-8
Online ISBN: 978-1-4614-4782-5
eBook Packages: Physics and AstronomyPhysics and Astronomy (R0)