Einstein's Relativistic Ether Conception / Schrödinger and Cosmology

0:00 The following is the idea. According to Einstein, one might not use the word Eater, but one has still to recognize the physical space of Saint Louis. Both the field has real properties which play an active part in physical happening. In Pilate, already in 924, that instead of speaking about ether, somebody might just as well speak about the physical voices of space. Questions? Hold on. Let's see here. I'm a little puzzled about your claim that what you're calling Einstein's ether models, that these are not well known to modern thinkers. And you listed, I think, physicists, historians, and philosophers. To illustrate, I look at what you call the ether model of special relativity. And what you proceed to describe sounds to me just like a Minkowski space-time, or at least as far as I could follow the description. You say it's flat, it's infinite, it has a pseudo-Euclidean metric, it determines the inertial behaviour of a test body, it transmits electromagnetic waves. This is just what everybody knows as a Minkowski space-time and recognises fully that it comes out of the work of Einstein. special relativity had a four-dimensional formulation, that this was Einstein's theory. As far as I can tell, the only thing that's not really known now is that Einstein started to use the term ether. But this seems to me to be a quirk of naming which, through many of the quotes that you give, Einstein seems to think to be unimportant. For example, he says, quote from 1934 that you give us, that physical space and ether are only different terms for the same thing. I think Einstein's ideas on physical space are certainly not known now.

2:30 that Einstein's ideas about space-time are very, very well known, but it is almost unknown that Einstein several times used the name Eater to this. Well, what I'm trying to press you for, then, is why you think this is so immensely significant. It seems to me to be a quirk of naming the one that came and went, and at best it's curious, and at worst it's misleading. Why? For instance, when de Broglie wrote his thesis concerning the matter waves, he considered the matter waves as waves of Einstein's Peter Higgins presented with the model that matter waves are waves of the space-time structure and therefore to To consider the space-time as something material, I think that for what is known in quantum mechanics is something which is used. To consider the space-time... I'll give a direct answer to Professor Martin. At least, this concept of use as used by Einstein has confused many people of the kind. you see it when you read anti-religious letters because then they say, well, first you abolished it and now it's coming back. And of course they have not read enough in order to make a difference in conception, they just cling to the word. And so I think this is one of the many occasions in physics where this unfortunate custom prevails that physicists So in a sense, I think it is important to express this, and it has played a role in the history of the media executives.

5:00 Sorry, the horn has played a role. Well, that Einstein found the fresh new concept for people. I mean, that has profoundly many, many people. Since there are still people who don't have to use the ether concept in the old sense of a medium which a different state of motion can be attached to, I think it's very important not to give any grounds for confusion there. And therefore I would think it would be well advised not to use the words rigid and non-rigid, in reference to ISAT's concept of the ether, because rigid and non-rigid only have meaning if you can attach a state of motion to, if you divide the media into points, the state of motion can be discussed. If you, including your text, words rigid and non-rigid, you will just give ground to those people who want to treat these as they were such a medium. Einstein used this word. He used the word rigid? Not many of the quotes you gave. Not many of the quotes you gave. He did, obviously, but not many of the quotes you gave. I cannot answer your question. In the quotations you gave from Einstein, he did not use the word rigid and non-rigid. No, but I can show you in several papers you used rigid and non-rigid. For instance the... What's the word you translate as rigid? I'm Deutsch. Oh, we can discuss it privately. Yeah, I just want to say that Einstein, one could say he didn't abolish the ether in to the development, and when it came back, so to speak, this exchange of letters with Lorentz was really an intellectualization of the ether that he was put in some of the letters, and one has a means now of describing in a more basic and fundamental way a space-time full of description of phenomena. I mean, Lorentz's deep description is truly true, so it's a big spread of neon lights that would light up And I believe one can find in Einstein's writings, going back to Newton as well, a need to fill space with something just like one builds, one constructs pre-scientific knowledge, one constructs pre-scientific knowledge on the basis of, psychological basis, contiguous action rather than action logistic.

7:30 And so there is a, one sees a Newton and Einstein as well, a need to move, so to speak, a new line of technology, move from a theory of potential law, which were, what am I saying, at his face, to the theories, to the structure of the theories, based on the concept of that in his face. And that, I think, is a reason also why Lawrence, although he never believed, so to speak, for what he understood of special relativity, certainly, did make contributions to the general relativity here. Structures, space-time, appear again on which light waves would move. On which light would move, whereas in special relativity, one of the criticisms of it had always been that Einstein's theory would explain that anything happened. Einstein's special relativity is kinematic. Sorry, I think that I... I think it's unfair to say that there are various parts of the ether do not move with respect to each other. But its absolute state of motion is something that you can't do in Europe, so it's nothing like absolute space. I have a question. I have a question here. Okay, I'll ask you off the floor. I have to add to this discussion that in the last decades of his life, Einstein was concerned with unitary field theories, of which he created a large number of models. So I think he was very conscious of the distinction between a differentiable manifold, though he didn't use that term, and the structure you impose on the differentiable manifold, metric, affine, or otherwise. and that he conceived of this structure or set of structures as the potential carriers of physical distinctiveness and including the dynamics of physics.

10:00 Now, whether it's fortunate or unfortunate that we use for the latter a term like ether, I think simply from the point of view of clarifying these ideas, the distinction between differential manifold as such and this geometric structure imposed on it, He could, if he wanted to, use the term either for them or for them. The reason that together with Rosen, the review paper, in which Einstein considered elementary particles as a portion of space. You see that Einstein considered space, time, a certain kind of matter. Because elementary particles are going to be named in this paper, portions of space. And that is why I think that the word either helps to understand Einstein's idea that most of the elementary part because not personal space, how space considered in a certain sense as a certain kind as a method to intend it. Thank you very much. Our last speaker this afternoon at the lunch that we're all so eagerly waiting Dr. Revanke from the Institute for Theoretical Physics at the University of Vienna and his topic would be Frödinger and Cosmology. Well, in reviewing Schödinger's work on relativity and cosmology

12:30 I must say that this was not the area where he had his great success and to review it here, I do it just because it's interesting to see these ideas and the ideas in front of the economy are really connected and there is a deep time going through the work of Schrödinger starting from the first paper in 1918 on cosmology. I will stress that Schrödinger was used to experimental work and to the evaluation of experimental work. He meditated numerical studies of experiments and so he was very impressed by the Einstein way of proceeding from principle and in particular he was very much impressed by the way Einstein derived his cosmological ideas from the principle of covariance and Marx principle. And the first work of Schrodinger on cosmology in 1918 was no calculation at all but just a reinterpretation of the Einstein paper on cosmology. And the central step was only to shift the cosmological term from the left hand side of the equation to the right So, in a sense, he didn't like the cosmological term, he put it to the right hand side of the matter term and could see that the sum of the old matter term, the cosmological term is a new matter term, obtaining of course these negative pressures, and he tried to interpret this in his paper in anschauliche way. The idea is, if you have some elastic body rigged between two rigid walls, then you have, if it's rigged, you have a negative pressure in here. I have here a copy of a reprint from Trillinus-Pilat. Which is it? Yeah, which shows that he kept his reference and kept working on the old papers.

15:00 So as you see here, in 1937, inserting the numbers which people had in, because the public's work, and calculating those stresses. So, I don't want to comment on this paper too much. It would also be fun to look at the page before that, which I don't have, where he puts side remarks saying schluss, which is nonsense. So the interpretations he gave on the sum of those two tensors, in part, he considers as nonsense. That's also 37, too. Yeah, that's also nonsense. That's 37. Okay, so this shows that he always tried to consider his work as a whole and tried to see a development of his ideas and come back to his old ideas. so the next thing would be to go to quantum theory he comes to quantum theory by considering Weyl's theory unified electron and gravitation what he's interested in is whether the geodesics of the Weyl connection have something to do charged particles. And that's not only a question of geometrical interest, but of real physical interest. Namely, he remarks that there are no uncharged elementary particles. Remember that is 1922 when this paper is written. So in 1922 there are no uncharged elementary particles. Therefore the geodesic principle is no good at all. I mean, remember we had this discussion of the Rosenfeld analysis where the existence of neutral particles was essential. Well, at that time people had discovered neutral particles, maybe neutral, but in 1922 there were no uncharted element of particles, and therefore he asked whether the knowledge of the right connection that something could do with the project by Charles Park, this was not the case. But in thinking about this, he remarked another

17:30 namely, the Weyl theory had to be discarded because of the so-called second clock effect. When a clock returns to the same point, its rate would have been changed. and Schrödinger makes the following remark if this clock is really the electron in an atom and the spatially closed part is a Bohr orbit then the clock effect, the second clock effect would be eliminated if you change and make a slight change in the formula The formula is something like the exponent of the line integral a nu, the x mu of the four potentials of the electromagnetic heat. Well, and here it marks that if we put here i over some constant, which now is h-bar, times some integer number, then along the bore orbit, this thing here becomes unity. the quantization conditions turn out to be a condition of this here. Well, at that time, he doesn't know, he makes the formula mark if there is an I, but he has no idea why there should be an I. I mean, in old bias theory, there is no I. And he doesn't have the idea that this should be a phase factor that could multiply a complex wave function. And therefore, although he is, in some sense, quite close to quantum theory, So the wave mechanics, there's no wave mechanics at this point. And even when he has wave mechanics, he doesn't see the connection. And one knows that only in the last paper on wave mechanics, he sees that the general wave function has to be complex, because only in the last paper on his wave mechanics introduces the time-dependent wave equation, where the number i appears necessarily, whereas in the stationary wave mechanics the complex wave functions have to be used only in connection with magnetic fields. So it couldn't really connect this to wave mechanics, but this was done immediately after wave mechanics by other authors,

20:00 I think London was the first to do that but also Fock and Weil in the paper which was mentioned by Kitchener-Same in this meeting here so the next step in developing ideas of this type came in I think it was 1932 it was a rather formal paper in a curved space there he does something which in a sense is also typical for Schrodinger namely he tries to eliminate the fearbinds the tetrads which Spock and Weill have introduced as far as possible it doesn't succeed completely as we have heard but he tries to eliminate them as far as possible it seems that He wants to somehow to avoid group theory as possible, so the potential Lorentz group, he wants to avoid, and he wants to stick to space-time, and that is described by those coordinates which are not the rectangle in general. and somehow he escapes the field line formalism and at the same time does not he doesn't know, for instance, Carton's formulation of general relativity where the field lines are used from the outset and this leads him to avoid to develop gauge theory because, you know, he worked in close neighbors to, for instance, Heidler and other people who had the idea, who developed the idea of isotopic spin. Now, isotopic spin and the isotopic spin group was something quite related to this phase group here. But he didn't like those group theoretical ideas. abstract nature of those isotropic spins. They always liked to work unshowlit. This was a stumbling block for him to develop quantum mechanics in the direction it was done by

22:30 other people. He liked unshowlit class. And he expressed mistakes in one of the quantum mechanics papers. He said, if you can understand a phenomenon, it has to be in terms of bank for many. And the dank for him are to understand the phenomena in space and time. He explicitly writes then, there are phenomena which cannot be understood. He says there are phenomena in nature which cannot be understood. But I don't think that the atomic phenomena belong to this class. and so if something is to be understood it has to be understood in space-time and that's for instance the reason for him not to accept the idea of isotopic fields he accepts the idea of meson fields but not the idea of isotopic fields and therefore he avoids being the founders of this development gauge theory. Also he likes Weill's gauge theory very much. Okay, so he has the Dirac equation in curved space and at the moment he develops that he doesn't really know what to do with it in terms of application. And so he plays around with it. He was a master of the method of separation of variables so he puts the Dirac equation in various examples of curve space models, tried to separate equations, solved and had exchanges with von Neumann, Taut and Princeton, who also had worked out methods of writing down and solving the Dirac equation in curved space. But at first he doesn't know what to do with it. But when he encountered Eddington's ideas on the unity in the world, or the ideas of the connection between microcosm and macrocosm. Then he found out what the application of these equations would be. Well, Eddington's ideas are essentially the following. When you consider a closed world model

25:00 and you fill it with, say, some fermions, then this, first of all, this would determine energy levels, and if it's a fermion gas, then it determines a certain fermionergy, and that fermionergy will be related, or the idea is to relate this fermionergy with the elastic mass of elementary properties. That's basically one of the ideas. Now, the relation that Eddington postulates is a relation where this mass or rest energy of the Kerman is related to the number of particles in the universe, and the formula contains the square root of the number of particles in the universe. Well, Schrödinger really likes the philosophical idea that microcosm and cosmology are related. Actually, the slogan of the relation between those two goes back to Weill. He tries to escape the criticism concerning the second clock effect by saying that clocks are not influenced by this round parallel transport, but he gives some argument concerning local curvature, which is not important, but what is important is that this place he uses which is the slogan, microcosm through a detour through cosmology. So that is a slogan created by Ryle, just to escape this criticism. The old Gage theory wasn't developed, but the slogan was in Schrodinger's head and it never left him. So here, he liked this Eddington theory very much. He gave a book review on Eddington's book and he gave a talk at the Bologna Conference in 1937 presenting Eddington's ideas, writing down the formula which gives the mass of an elementary particle, proton mass in terms of the radius of the universe and the number of particles including this square here.

27:30 He presents the formula without any detailed derivation should come from this Firmware energy consideration. Now he did this in front of people like Powery and Heisenberg and others sitting there and it was known to him, first of all, that he himself could not justify this query. He had an exchange with Eddington telling Eddington that it is impossible to derive this formula on irrational faces, as he says. But nevertheless, although point, he presents the theory there and really some of them of the audience should have considered Schrodinger even more an outsider in physics than he was before, not accepting the standard interpretation of quantum mechanics. So he liked the idea of unity in the world so much that he really sacrificed his scientific reputation of this need. Well, he knew about this and he tried very hard, nevertheless, to justify it. His understanding of human statistics was the standard one and that leads to the Q-book. had a paper then, perhaps I the conference report where the square root appears and then I can show you the paper of 1940 where he says I've tried to arrive at something like this formula in many more elaborate and sophisticated ways probably letting square roots live in instead of the cube and really tried hard and then he writes these attempts are hardly encouraging So, finally, in 1940, he gave up this theory completely, but during this time, between 1930, 1970 and 1940, when he gave it up, he did detailed calculations. These detailed calculations did not lead to a deeper understanding of the Eddington theory, but it led him

30:00 to discover a new phenomenon first of all he had acquainted himself with the Einstein static universe in the 3-sphere in the second paper on the solutions of the wave equation he uses the Clifford parallels or coordinated systems that are connected to the Clifford parallels on the 3-sphere and then he goes the Sitter model and solves the wave equation in an expanding universe and finds the phenomenon of frequency mixing, namely he has to decide upon a separation between positive and negative frequency parts of the solutions of a relative wave equation and he finds that in a time dependent on expanding the universe, a wave which is purely positive frequency in some sense, at early times will not be purely positive frequency, at later times, and he calls this an alarming phenomenon, because with particles, he says, this would mean the creation of particle, anti-particle pairs. I have underlined this in this paper. In this phenomenon of outstanding importance, Spartacism would mean production or non-revealation of matter merely by expansion, whereas in the light there would be production of light traveling in the opposite direction. It's a sort of reflection of light in the motion of space. Alarmed by these prospects, I have investigated. Question in more detail. Well, these are not so alarming he finds when the expansion is uniform, whereas if the expansion is accelerated then he finds that this would be more dangerous. Here, when he does detailed calculations, he also finds that the separation into positive and negative frequency parts is non-unique, depending on the kind of how you can do the separation. for instance he analyzes the sitter space in more detail there he finds at least three ways on how to do the separation he doesn't really bother about this non-uniqueness in general for the expanding universe he has one way

32:30 of separating and that for the uniform expansion there's no big danger in this text it says which particles it would be a creation or annihilation but nevertheless he never introduces quantum field theory so he doesn't give a formal reformulation of this in terms of quantum field theory probably because he never liked quantum field theory quantum field theory in a sense was dangerous for him because quantum field theory is the formal unification of the particle and he didn't really want to solve this, right? So therefore he didn't want to like to do this by quantum field theory calculation and he never calculated the creation trait. So this effect he obtained and then because he saw that he could not really change this, he gave the thing completely up. and now the funny thing is what happened to the effect of the creation of matter by the universe it seems that he wanted to forget completely and this is documented by the fact that in 1956 he wrote a booklet called Expanding Universes which was very influential on several people read it, and there it gives all the mathematics necessary to calculate the effect of this creation and calculation, but it doesn't do the calculation. It is completely classical, the mathematics is there, but it's not used to call the conclusion, which it had drawn before. And there's another funny thing, at Dublin I looked at the annual reports, it is documented that the steady being discussed there. I don't remember who did it, but I looked in the other reports. The status theory is being discussed there. The status theory requires a continuous creation of matter. There was Professor Schrödinger who had discovered this effect ten years ago. Schrödinger didn't offer his discovery, so to say, and other people didn't know about

35:00 Professor Turing spent half a year in Dublin and he says he cannot remember that Schrodinger mentioned this effect at this time. So Schrodinger didn't want, obviously didn't want to be reminded of this discovery. So this then ended Schrodinger's cosmological considerations. He considered unified field theories, which he did not relate to cosmology explicitly. And therefore, that's what I wanted to say about Schrödinger and cosmology. He just gave it up, for me, in a rather radical fashion. Now, after my talk, I should like Professor Hamas to give his impressions of Schrödinger's lectures in Vienna, because these were on the Edicton theory. and I also should like to say that Professor Papapetro asked me to state that he spent two years in Dublin, however related to 1946, I think, to 48, and he was working together with Schrodinger on unified theory, and he once wanted me to say that these were two the happiest years in his life I should like to spend two minutes or so on the future development of the Schrodinger effect of creation of particles by gravitational these future developments were like this and as far as I know I didn't make a very detailed amount this is 53, with a paper by De Witt, which is totally quantum field theory. And this discusses already the vacuum polarization effects, but not the real particle creation. And it doesn't in any way go into details concerning the problem of defining positive and negative frequency path.

37:30 rather it goes to the problem of radializing the energy momentum tensor well around 1960 I found a Japanese paper I don't remember the name I think it's Imamura also given a calculating iteration rate in terms of quantum field theory in a very idealized gravitational field whether this is a coordinate-dependent effect because one has to do the calculation in terms of coordinates, one has to separate rate equations in terms of coordinates. This feeling that this could be a coordinate-dependent effect is analyzed by calculating the Riemann tensor and trying to establish a connection between the Riemann tensor and the creation rate. However, it turns out that one can generalize this model where he can do the calculation. And in the generalization, the relation between creation rate and Riemann tensor is immediately destroyed. So the air relation doesn't really exist except in this special case. But I think the Japanese have continued here and done more work in this direction. However, it was not related to cosmology. of creation, so the Schrödinger effect, relation to cosmology, was suggested by Tilling to me in 1962. He explicitly said to me, well, the steady-state people want to have a continuous creation, but I don't just sit down and calculate it from quantum field theory and see how much so I sat down and did something in this direction now in 1965 the steady state theory became unpopular and the question is what to do with the Schrodinger effect well it was quite clear that at the Big Bang there should be appreciable creation rates but certainly at the Big Bang also the gravitational field should be Somehow, from the quantum field point of view, this is not very relevant.

40:00 Nevertheless, we investigated these things formally, and at the same time, Sidney Coleman suggested to Leonard Parker to do calculations in this direction, and Parker published his results in 1969. We did it also at the same time, somewhat earlier, but Parker obtained the results around 65 or so. Okay, but this still didn't make the whole thing very popular. And I think it was in 72 or so that Leopold Halban pointed out that the effect had been So we did not at this time know that Schrodinger had done this. In 1966, so one year after I had the first response, I wrote to Marcus Fiertz and presented him my investigations. And one of his answers was, hasn't Schrodinger done a thing in that direction? he didn't know explicitly he just asked me whether Schrodinger had done something but he didn't know the reference and then I think it was on a GRG meeting that he wanted to this out but this Schrodinger effect was not considered important after 69 it was Zendovich and the Russian school who used the Schrodinger effect in connection with the isotrovisation of an unisotropic universe so inducing up the unisotropic energy and also the same idea was worked out by Miesner and his group but this still didn't make the effect very popular the effect was made very popular only by the discovery of Pop So let me say 1969 to 1972, this was Nisner and Tredovic, and it was only in 1974 when Hawking considered the effect of the particle creation by the black hole.

42:30 Well, as such, the effect would not be very reliable because of this uncertainty of choosing positive and negative frequency. However, before that, there was a form of thermodynamics of black holes describing to a black hole an entropy. And people asked, well, there's an entropy, but where's the temperature? The temperature of a black hole, classical, was zero, and the calculation of Hawking showed that if one does the calculation properly, choosing positive and negative frequency parts properly, then you get a temperature which really fits to the form of thermodynamics. So the kind of arbitrariness which was behind the choice of positive and negative frequency parts, or propagators or whatever, there are various alternative ways of doing the same thing. This non-uniqueness was set up here by fitting one possible way to the form of thermodynamics. It fits so nicely that people tend to accept it. And one year later Hawking derived the temperature rather than entropy of the black hole from quantization considerations on quantum fluctuations around the black hole, around the classical Schwarzschild solution and then people thought that quantization of the gravitational field should be reconsidered and a new wave attacking the quantization of the gravitational field set in. where we know what happened, we are still, it is still a big question mark, but the development will certainly be here. But it was totally unrelated to Schrödinger, as we know. Thank you. Questions? Well, I just wanted to bring up, bring to your attention, further historical studies. There is a body of literature that exists that discusses on Schoenig and on Schoenig's guy, particularly with Schoeniger as well. I was puzzled why you brought that up and then dropped it. It must be important that Schoeniger's career.

45:00 I was a little bit confused at the beginning of the election with who did what and when, you know, with topping all over the place. with respect to isotopic spin, Schroeder into Heisenberg into D.C. 32, but then people want to... There was nothing, as far as I know, with respect to root theory and isotopic spin roots until D.C. 37, when he wrote a paper-classified nuclei, which is actually SU-4. And then he named it, in fact, isotopic spin, but I don't know what to do. It's difficult for you to see the relationship of Schrodinger with this whole thing. No, the radiation was developing. As I say, in 37, Wigner and I think it was Kenma. Kenma was in Dublin, and Schrodinger was in Dublin from, what was it, after 39, yeah? Kenma was in Dublin, and he did it, and Heidler, they were working on isotopic spin and it was Schrodinger who's close by. What does that have to do with Anschalig? What does that have to do with Anschalig? Oh, the point is, Schrodinger liked very much the old white gauge theory. He still accepted the new white gauge theory because the complex wave function still was some wave, anschaulich wave for him, although it was. However, the main component wave function, whose components would have values in an inner space, which was no more anschaulich for him. That didn't like it. Well, what would you say is certain the hidden speck-anschaulich of the Zeno-Vegum? What? The Zeno-Vegum effect, I mean, this should have something to do with the graphs. Iisotopic spin is more abstract than spin. The spin can't be visualized, right? Yeah. Well, I would like to add a historical footnote.

47:30 You may not realize that Schrodinger was a Catholic, but he was an anti-Nazi, and he was an awful progressive, and so he never made it for a professorship in Vienna. So in 1938, he had a professorship in Graz, which is a small town in Austria, and in the spring of 1938, he announced that he would give a course in Vienna on cosmology and quantum mechanics. And so he started that sometime in February 1938. and so the first lecture was packed and he just went right into the topic on the level appropriate for a theoretical physicist i think we talked about heading and this gave one lecture on that the next lecture was uh only the physicists had been left everybody had a seat. As far as I remember, there was a third lecture, and then there was the Anschluss, and Schrodinger never showed up again, of course, he happened to be in Austria, and I'm very impressed about the high opinion Dr. Bunker had about my memory. But this was more than 50 years ago, and I assure you that in March 1938, after the Anschluss, one had other things to worry about, and to think about those lectures by Schrodinger. So I cannot say much about it anymore, except that I think I still have my notes somewhere, and so I can reconstruct it. But the fact is that this is the sum total of Schrödinger's activity at the University of Vietnam before we have to work through. Just a brief historical question. The methods used in the couple of works you listed on the right-hand side parallel strictly those that are used to treat quantum fields with external electric fields Do you have any idea when the phenomenon of frequency mixing was first discovered for external electric fields?

50:00 Well, it's related to the so-called plant power course, and I think it was 28 years ago. The effect is, as you say, it's closely parallel. say the following, if you linearize the gravitational field around the flat background and introduce gravitons in this way, to something analogous to quantum electrodynamics, then it's quite clear that this effect should exist. But Schrodinger didn't think that way, he didn't like this. He really encountered the effect by thinking about Eddington theory. Just a wild idea, do you think he perhaps didn't want to be associated with Yordan and constant creation? With Yordan? In his reluctance to bring his own ideas to public notice, when the Hoyle Bondi Gold people came on the scene. Do you think that was because he didn't want his name to be associated with Pascal Jordan? I have no idea. No, I just wondered if there was any sort of friction between them. They certainly were not ideologically of the same mind, were they? Well, the mind of Jordan was, you know, changed from time to time. When the Nazis came, he He was a communist when the Nazis went. He was a Nazi, so it was somehow... I think he did what the people were in power to do or something like that. Were the communists in power? No, before the Nazis came, the communists were very important in Germany. I was just intrigued by what is the two levels. First, how you emphasize when you go to Bologna, the emphasis is outside the status. I was wondering how that relates to his period in the following sense, that used to talk about how he doesn't talk about these things which he did during the period but also if you read the letters from Schrodinger before or too bad

52:30 even though he talks about things leading up to him going to Austria or up to he never talks about that Austrian period for those two years it is a total I mean he really doesn't learn and so somehow I don't know what your comments are that since, well, the discovery of this particle creation, as far as I can see, was done in W, but maybe the ideas in this head were already conceived in class. Published from Graz, I think is the one paper together with a student, Müller, and the paper on the solutions, the the proper vibrations of the static universe were published in the Academy of, what do you call it, of Rome, the Poblokary, so it is, yeah, yeah, okay, and the Expanded Universe paper was published from Dublin, but at what time he had the idea and to what time he doesn't want to refer, I can't say. Maybe that could be I'm quite sure that one of the reasons he didn't want to talk about it after all I don't know how he must have felt being a Nobel winner and still not managing to have a professorship in Vienna but being sent to the provinces so I'm sure he would not like to think back to that period. Do you have any other questions? Comments? I would propose that before we break for lunch and end the last session of the conference that we all give ourselves a round of applause for a very wonderful conference. Thank you. Thank you.

55:00 Thank you.