Einstein

by Philipp Frank

  The scientists of the Royal Society were now ready to recognize that a direct observation of nature had corroborated the theory of the “curvature of space” and the invalidity of Euclidean geometry in gravitational field. Nevertheless, it was ominous of coming developments that during the formal session the president of the Royal Society himself said: “I have to confess that no one has yet succeeded in stating in clear language what the theory of Einstein really is.” He persisted in his assertion that many scientists were themselves forced to admit their inability to express simply the actual meaning of Einstein’s theory. It really meant that they were unable to grasp the meaning of the theory itself; all they could understand were its consequences within their special field. This situation subsequently contributed a good deal to the confusion of the lay public regarding Einstein’s theory.

  7. Attitude of the Public

  The significance of the new theory was soon appreciated by men who were themselves creatively active in the development of science, but many of the so-called “educated” people were annoyed that the traditional knowledge acquired with great effort in the schools had been overthrown. Since such people were themselves convinced of their lack of understanding of astronomy, mathematics, and physics, they attacked the new theory in the fields of philosophy and politics, in which they felt themselves qualified.

  Thus an editorial writer in a reputable American newspaper wrote of the session of the Royal Society described above: “These gentlemen may be great astronomers, but they are sad logicians. Critical laymen have already objected that scientists who proclaim that space comes to an end somewhere are under some obligation to tell what lies behind it.”

  We recall that the statement: “Space is finite” has nothing to do with an “end” of space. It means rather that light rays traveling through the world space return along a closed curve to their origin. The editorial writers of daily newspapers like to represent the standpoint of the “man in the street,” who is more often influenced by a medieval philosophical tradition than by the progress of science.

  The editorial continues:

  “This fails to explain why our astronomers appear to think that logic and ontology depend on the shifting views of astronomers. Speculative thought was highly advanced long before astronomy. A sense of proportion ought to be useful to mathematicians and physicists, but it is to be feared that British astronomers have regarded their own field as of somewhat greater consequence than it really is.”

  The same tendency to play off common sense — that is, in this case, the knowledge acquired in elementary schools — against the progress of science is also evident in another editorial that appeared in the same reputable paper about this time:

  “It would take the president of at least two Royal Societies to give plausibility or even thinkability to the declaration that as light has weight space has limits. It just doesn’t, by definition, and that’s the end of that — for common folks, however it may be for higher mathematicians.”

  Since in the opinion of the man in the street the two Royal Societies were affected by delusions which made them incapable of understanding things that were clear to anyone with an average school education, he began to inquire why such a thing had happened. An explanation was soon found, which was very illuminating for the man in the street.

  One week after the famous London meeting, a professor of celestial mechanics at Columbia University, New York, wrote:

  “For some years past the entire world has been in a state of unrest, mental as well as physical. It may well be that the war, the Bolshevist uprising, are the visible objects of some deep mental disturbance. This unrest is evidenced by the desire to throw aside the well-tested methods of government in favor of radical and untried experiments. This same spirit of unrest has invaded science. There are many who would have us throw aside the well-tested theories upon which have been built the entire structure of modern scientific and mechanical development in favor of methodological speculation and phantastic dreams about the Universe.”

  The writer then pointed out that the situation was analogous to the period of the French Revolution, when as a result of similar revolutionary mental diseases doubts were expressed concerning the Newtonian theory, though these objections later proved to be incorrect.

  While various individuals were vexed by these innovations which disturbed their pride in their education, others received the matter in a more friendly manner. Einstein’s predictions of the stellar shifts had shown, so these men thought, that physical phenomena could be predicted by means of pure thought, by pure mathematical speculation about the geometry of universal space. The view of the “wicked” empiricists and materialists that all science rests on experience, a view that caused so many conflicts with religion and ethics, had now been dropped by science itself. In an editorial dealing with the session of the Royal Society the London Times said: “Observational science has in fact led back to the purest subjective idealism.” And “idealism” for the educated Englishman who received his education from his school, his church, and the Times was the diametrical opposite of “materialistic” Bolshevism.

  The psychological situation in Europe at this time increased the interest of the general public in Einstein’s theory. English newspapers tried to efface every connection between Germany and the man whom they were honoring. Einstein himself was averse to any tactics of this kind, not because he placed any value in being regarded as a representative of German science, but because he hated every manifestation of narrow-minded nationalism. He also believed that he could advance the cause of international conciliation if he utilized his fame for this purposeé. When the Times requested him to describe the results of his theory for the London public, he did so on November 28 and used this opportunity to express his opinion in a friendly, humorous way. He wrote:

  “The description of me and my circumstances in the Times shows an amusing flare of imagination on the part of the writer. By an application of the theory of relativity to the taste of the reader, today in Germany I am called a German man of science and in England I am represented as a Swiss Jew. If I come to be regarded as a ‘bête noire’ the description will be reversed, and I shall become a Swiss Jew for the German and a German for the English.”

  At that time Einstein did not anticipate how soon this joke would come true. The editor of the Times was slightly annoyed by the characterization of the way in which regard was taken of the prejudice of the middle-class British, and likewise answered in a semi-humorous vein: “We concede him his little joke. But we note that in accordance with the general tenor of his theory Dr. Einstein does not supply any absolute description of himself.” The Times was also somewhat uneasy over the fact that Einstein did not have any feeling of belonging completely to a definite nation or race.

  In Germany itself the news of the events in London acted like a spark that caused the explosion of pent-up emotion. It was a double satisfaction. The achievement of a scientist from a defeated and humiliated country had been recognized by the proudest of the victor nations. Furthermore, the discovery was not based on any collection of empirical researches but arose rather from a creative imagination which by its power had guessed the secret of the universe as it actually is, and the correctness of the solution of the puzzle had been confirmed by the precise astronomical observations of the cool-headed Englishmen.

  The situation contained still another peculiarity in that the discoverer was a descendant of the Jewish people who had often been insulted and slighted by the defeated nation. The members of the Jewish community had often been compelled to hear and to read that while their race possessed a certain craftiness in business pursuits, in science it could only repeat and illuminate the work of others, and that truly creative talents were denied them. That this unique, ancient people had again produced a leader in the intellectual world not only seemed exciting for the Jews themselves, but also was a kind of consolation and stimulus for all the vanquished and humiliated people of the world.
/>
  A Russian observer gave this description of the remarkable psychological situation in defeated Germany at that time:

  “With the growing social misery there appeared among the intellectuals pessimistic currents of thought, ideas about the decline of Western culture, and, with the violence of a hurricane, religious movements. The extent of these movements must seem remarkable even to one who is acquainted with German intellectual life. The number of independent religious groups in Germany grew endless. World War invalids, merchants, officers, students, artists, all were seized by the desire to create a metaphysical basis for their view of the world.”

  This flight from tragic reality into a dream world also increased the enthusiasm for Einstein’s theory, which occupied a special place because it appeared to the public that here a portion of the reality of the universe had been discovered by dreams.

  In Soviet Russia people at this time were in the process of constructing a new social order on principles that were consciously opposed to the pessimistic ideas of the “declining” West. They renounced all idealistic dreams or at least believed that they were doing so. They wanted to dissociate themselves as completely as possible from the attitudes prevalent both in the defeated and in the victorious countries. Everywhere they looked for signs of “decline.” It was thought that such symptoms likewise evidenced themselves in the development of physical science. As early as 1922 A. Maximov, a leading exponent of Soviet Russian political philosophy who occupied himself especially with the physical sciences, wrote in the official philosophical journal of Soviet Russia in conjunction with the above description of German life:

  “This idealistic atmosphere has surrounded and still surrounds the relativity theory. It is only natural, therefore, that the announcement of ‘general relativity’ by Einstein was received with delight by the bourgeois intelligentsia. The impossibility within the limits of bourgeois society for the intellectuals to withdraw from these influences led to the circumstance that the relativity principle served exclusively religious and metaphysical tendencies.”

  Here we note something of the feeling against Einstein that was to develop in some groups of the Soviet Union.

  In this connection, however, it should not be forgotten that at the same time in Germany opinions were expressed characterizing Einstein’s theory as “Bolshevism in physics,” similar to those of the aforementioned American scientist. The rejection of Einstein’s theories by some prominent Soviet spokesmen did nothing to change these opinions. And since the Bolsheviks and the Jews were commonly regarded as somehow related, we are not surprised to find that the relativity theory soon began to be regarded as “Jewish” and capable of harming the German people. This hostile attitude toward Einstein emanated in Germany from those circles which ascribed the loss of the war to the “stab in the back” and not to the failure of the ruling classes.

  For Einstein himself this intrusion of politics and nationalism into the judgment of his theories was completely astonishing — indeed, hardly comprehensible. For a long time he had hardly paid any attention to these things and had not even noticed many such attacks. But gradually complete absorption in the regularities of the universe began to be difficult for him. More and more the anarchy of the human world pushed into the foreground. With brutal force it slowly but surely laid claim to a greater or lesser part of his intellectual energy.

  VII

  EINSTEIN AS A PUBLIC FIGURE

  1. Einstein’s Political Attitude

  With the intense public interest aroused by the confirmation of his theory, Einstein ceased to be a man in whom only scientists were interested. Like a famous statesman, a victorious general, or a popular actor, he became a public figure. Einstein realized that the great fame that he had acquired placed a great responsibility upon him. He considered that it would be egoistic and conceited if he simply accepted the fact of his recognition and continued to work on his researches. He saw that the world was full of suffering, and he thought he knew some causes. He also saw that there were many people who pointed out these causes, but were not heeded because they were not prominent figures. Einstein realized that he himself was now a person whom the world listened, and consequently he felt it his duty to call attention to those sore spots and so help eradicate them. He did not think of working out a definite program, however, he did not feel within himself the calling to become a political, social, or religious reformer. He knew no more about such things than any other educated person. The advantage he possessed was that he could command public attention, and he was a man who was not afraid, if necessary, to stake his great reputation.

  It was always clear to him that anyone venturing to express his opinion about political or social questions must emerge from the cloistered halls of science into the turmoil of the market place, and he must expect to be opposed with all the weapons common to the market place. Einstein accepted this situation as self-evident and included in the bargain. He also realized that many of his political opponents would also become his scientific opponents.

  In the years immediately following the World War it was only natural that the main problem of all political reformers was the prevention of another such catastrophe. The obvious means to this goal were the cultivation of international conciliation, struggle against economic need, for disarmament, and the emphatic rejection of all attempts to cultivate the militaristic spirit. The surest and indeed an infallible method of obtaining the desired end seemed to be the refusal of military service by the individual, the organization of “conscientious objectors” on a large scale. All these ideas appeared as obvious to Einstein as they did to so many others. Only he had more courage and more opportunity than others to advocate them. Einstein did not have the self-complacency with which scholars, especially in Germany, liked to retire into the ivory tower of science. But the means toward the goal appeared to him at that time, as to many thousands, much simpler and more certain than was later found to be the case.

  Einstein’s political position, like that of all the intellectuals in the world, changed during the twenty years of armistice between the two World Wars, but he was never a member of any political party. Parties made use of his authority where they could do so, but he was never active in any group. This was due fundamentally to the fact that Einstein was never really interested in politics.

  Only to very superficial judges does Einstein appear to be a genius so buried in his researches that he finds all his happiness in them without being influenced by the outside world. There are many more unresolved contradictions in Einstein’s character than one would believe at first glance, and these, as I have mentioned already, are due to the contrast between his intense social consciousness on the one hand and the aversion to entering into too intimate relations with his fellow men on the other.

  This trait manifests itself above all in his attitude toward political groups, with which he has co-operated at times because he sympathized with some of their aims. There were always moments when it was extremely vexatious for him to be forced into actions and expressions of which he did not approve, and the moment always recurred when he developed antipathies to the representatives of the groups with which he sympathized. Moreover, he did not like to claim any special role for himself and so he sometimes participated in things that were actually not very much to his liking. When something of this sort happened, naturally he did not become any fonder of the people who had caused him to do so. As a result he impressed many people as a vacillatory supporter. He always stood first for what seemed valuable to him, but he was not ready to let himself be influenced too much by party stereotypes and slogans. This was his attitude in his co-operation with the Zionists, pacifists, and socialists.

  Einstein realized very well that everything has several aspects and that by supporting a good cause one must often help one that is less worthy. Many people who are essentially hypocrites seize upon such situations and refuse to participate in any good cause because of “moral scruples.” Such behavior was not Einste
in’s way of acting. If the basic cause was good he was occasionally ready to take into the bargain a less worthy, secondary tendency. He was much too realistic and critical a thinker to believe that any movement conducted by human beings to attain human aims could be perfect.

  He helped the Zionist movement, for instance, because he believed that it was of value in creating a feeling of self-respect among the Jews as a group and in providing a refuge for homeless Jews. He was well aware, however, that at the same time he was helping occasionally the development of nationalism and religious orthodoxy, both of which he disliked. He saw that at present no other instrument than a kind of nationalism was available to produce a feeling of self-respect in the rank and file of the Jewish community.

  There were times, however, when the prospect of having his remarks interpreted falsely appeared so unpleasant to Einstein that he did not permit himself to be placed in a position where such a situation could develop. Einstein received repeated invitations to visit and lecture in Soviet Russia, especially during the early years of the development of her science, but he declined. Einstein realized that any friendly remark he might make to the country would be interpreted by the outside world as a sign that he was a Communist, and any critical remark would be taken by the Communists as a part of a capitalistic crusade against Russia.

  2. Anti-Semitism in Postwar Germany

  After the war, when Germany’s defeat led to a collapse of the rule of the generals and the junkers, who had generally been regarded as the source of all prejudice, many people thought that the period of discrimination against the Jews was now past. But actually the loss of power aroused a deep-seated feeling of anger in these classes. A human being is inconsolable over a catastrophe only so long as he believes its cause was due to his own inferiority. Consequently he tries to put the blame on someone else. Thus the supporters of the overthrown rulers spread the idea that the defeat had been caused not by military weakness, but by an internal revolt led by the Jews. The spread of this view caused a feeling of extreme hatred against the Jews in Germany. Such sentiments were very widespread even among the educated class, and they were all the more dangerous for the Jews because they were completely irrational. The Jews could not refute them by any arguments or escape the enmity by any change in their conduct.