Einstein's relative values
Herbert Dingle
Ideas and Opinions Albert Einstein (Souvenir Press e3.00)
This book is described as " an attempt to gather together, so far as is possible, in one volume the most important of Albert Einstein's general writings." Most of the items have already been collected in three volumes — The World as I See It, Out of My Later Years, Mein Weltbild — from which, in the publisher's opinion, the most important articles have been extracted and supplemented by reproductions of a few other writings. The whole book was first published in the US in 1954,. before Einstein's death, so it presumably
contains nothing that he would have wished not to be preserved. This is important, for it is probably rare for one who has reached an ad vanced age not to wish some of his earlier work forgotten; here we may have no mis givings on that account. The material is clas sified under five headings — Ideas and Opinions (subdivided into passages on Free dom, Religion, Education, Friends and Miscellaneous); Politics, Government, and Pacifism; the Jewish People; Germany; Contributions to Science. These claim, respectively, 78, 85, 32,9 and 161 pages. That the contributions to science should, occupy nearly half the book is fitting, for these are undoubtedly the most important. Not that a great man's views on subjects outside his special field are negligible, but the contribution they make is not to our understanding but to the relatively idle curiosity which we cannot help feeling about anything connected with an outstanding personality of any kind. The opposite views of Kipling and Francis Thompson on cricketers add nothing to our knowledge of cricket, and not until psychology is a far more advanced science. than it is now will they add anything significant to our understanding of the poets; nonetheless, we are glad to have them. Similarly, although Einstein's views on subjects outside science are worth preserving, they tell us nothing more valuable about those subjects than the views of any reasonably intelligent and equally well informed person. Einstein's writings on science, however, are of profound interest, for, however we may assess his contributions, there is no question that he was most exceptionally gifted in this field. What we are given here, of course, are not the papers on which his fame rests, which are highly technical, but his often expressed views on the nature of science itself and his own conclusions in particular, in writings addressed to the non-scientist as well as to the specialist. Although, unlike many popularisers of scientific ideas, Einstein never modified the strict meaning of the ideas he was expounding in order to give a simple but misleading familiar analogy, we must nevertheless distinguish between his actual achievements and his conception of them — It necessity of which he himself was fully aware when he said, in a passage reproduced on p. 270: "If you want to find out anything front the theoretical physicists about the methods they use. I advise you to stick closely to one principle: don't listen to their words, fix your attention on their deeds." Let us observe that precept here, amending it only by attending to both with care not to identify them. A parenthetical note of warning, however, is necessary. Most of the passages in this wholly English book are translations by various hands. These have unhappily sometimes been made by those clearly unfamiliar with the ideas. When, for instance, we read (p. 230) that "the speed at which clocks move depends on their state of motion," we need little knowledge of relativity to perceive that "the speed at which clocks move" is a mistranslation of " the rate at which clocks work," but there are many passages in which what is printed is so cryptic that one cannot but conclude that there is some unfathomable error in rendering.
Nevertheless, it is possible to form a trustworthy view of Einstein's view of science, which remained almost constant throughout his life, as a comparison of early and late passages shows. In broad terms we may say that he conceived of physical science as formed of two distinct parts. First, the theoretical physicist creates, by pure intuition, a mathematical model of a rationally consistent universe, without regard to anything observed in nature — although, of course, since he is a child of nature, the products of his intuition have a predisposition to accord with her workings. The second step is to compare the model with nature herself, and so correlate each of its elements with a
Particular natural phenomenon. A true' theory is one in which the correlation is perfect and complete; when that has been achieved science will have reached its goal. The process begins with the physical world, but when completed the physical model covers the whole universe: "the general laws on which the structure of theoretical physics is based claim to be valid for any natural phenomenon whatsoever ... including life" (p. 226), though we are as yet far from that consummation. When we compare this with Einstein's actual achievement, which represents his unconscious rather than conscious motivation, we find not a contradiction but a balance of emPhasis quite disproportionate to that riich the description seems to imply, While °Filially Einstein acknowledged the corresPondence of the model with nature as necessarY to a true theory, he was so absorbed in constucting the model as to act as though it ,were the whole business. Moszkowski, a
journalist whose conversations with
stein in his younger days have recently Sid reissued (Conversations with Einstein,
gwick and Jackson), reports that when he ,asked Einstein how he would react if observaon should contradict his gravitation theory, nstein replied: 'Such questions did not lie _
rnY path. That result could not be otherillse-tliah right. I was only concerned in put g the result into a lucid form. I did not for °I'Lle second doubt that it would agree with ouservation. There was no sense in getting lccited about what was self-evident." I con s that I feel this to be an exaggerated acPull of what Einstein must have said, but it represent his general state of mind. waen he had completed a beautiful theory he h,as satisfied; its testing had little interest for His friend, Max Born, tells us, for inlaiince, that when he first met Einstein in y"", Einstein " had already proceeded be1.,,c1 special relativity which he left to minor r°Phets." Had he given but slight attention h°he comparison of the mathematical symC's of that theory with physical clocks, he rould not have missed an anomaly that in ae,t never entered his mind. frill he same partiality accounts for.his dissent Th-Fn the generally adopted quantum theory. ri at theory requires a model that describes te°ii an actual but only a probable world. Eins nr."11,ould have none of it. He agreed that the rrovui wctions of the theory, such as they were, thFresPonded with observation, but a true 4,cirY has inevitability, not probability. th,,011 believe in the dice-playing god, and I in
nd Perfect rule of law," he told Max Born,
nd Perfect rule of law," he told Max Born,
thr orn, s reply that nevertheless we must cl,,w g dice to discover what he does fell on a' ears Einstein cared relatively little for .felt "We discover: he sought to know what he Must be, discovered or not. alit he fact is that Einstein was fundamentally to artist, and a scientist only by virtue of a al creed that beauty must be truth. And he.aian artist he would be recognised to have hi:11 if mathematical concepts, which were ril„' Material just as sounds are those of the thmsicians and shapes and colours those of Ihe Painter, were generally understood of Derfellople! His two theories of relativity are to t works of art, whatever their relation tumna,t,olre, while no one can claim that quandeJ Lueory has any beauty that we should riol'e it. It is one of the most remarkable curletties of history that a man supreme in one ills.'" of endeavour should be apotheosised for s,uPPosed achievements in another in to 11,en his failure is only too likely ultimately ‘v4ecorne recognised. It is as though Newton venerated for his exposition of the Book ur„"aniel and the Principia thought a mere "anlent adorning it, cr"jessor Dingle, author of Science at the. up,ssroad, is Professor Emeritus of History. ler.rhaosophy of Science at University Col-. 15e, London. He retired in 1955.
Previous page
