

6

DOCS.

FOR

VOL.

5

NOVEMBER 1911-MARCH

1912

Vol.

5,

312a. To Marie Curie

Prague, 23

November

1911

Highly

esteemed

Mrs.

Curie,[1]

Do not

laugh

at

me

for

writing you

without

having

anything

sensible

to

say.

But

I

am so

enraged by

the

base

manner

in which

the

public is

presently

daring to

concern

itself with

you[2]

that

I

absolutely

must

give

vent to

this

feeling. However,

I

am

convinced

that

you consistently despise

this

rabble,

whether it

obsequiously

lavishes

respect

on

you

or

whether it

attempts to

satiate

its

lust

for sensationalism!

I

am

impelled

to

tell

you

how

much I have

come

to admire

your intellect, your

drive,

and

your honesty,

and

that

I

consider

myself lucky

to have

made

your

personal acquaintance

in Brussels.

Anyone

who does not number

among

these

reptiles

is certainly

happy,

now as

before,

that

we

have such

personages among

us

as you,

and

Langevin[3]

too,

real

people

with whom

one

feels

privileged

to be in

contact. If

the rabble

continues to

occupy

itself with

you,

then

simply

don’t

read

that

hogwash,

but rather

leave

it

to

the

reptile

for whom it has been

fabricated.

With

most

amicable

regards

to

you, Langevin,

and

Perrin,[4]

yours very truly,

A.

Einstein

P.S. I have

determined the statistical

law of

motion

of

the

diatomic

molecule

in Planck’s

radiation

field

by

means

of

a

comical

witticism,

naturally

under the

constraint

that the structure’s motion

follows

the

laws of

standard

mechanics.

My hope

that

this

law is

valid in

reality

is

very

small,

though.[5]

Vol.

5,

375a. From Walther Nernst[1]

Berlin,

26a Am

Karlsbad, 23

March

[1912][2]

Esteemed

Professor

Einstein,

With

these lines

I just

want to

express my joy

at

the

prospect

of

arriving

at

agreement

in

an

oral

discussion,

at

which

the

presence

of

our

colleague

Planck[3]

is naturally

not

only extremely

welcome

but could make mine almost

superfluous.

Nor do

I

want

to address

today

your

view

that

publications

could do

no

harm

because

one

does not have to read

them[4]-I

do

think, though,

that

such

an

attitude,

if it

were

prevalent,

would

hamper

the

steady

development

of physics–

rather,

only

to

express again my delight

that

I

can

welcome

you

here

soon.

I

shall