See how it looked in 1921

Interview on the Relativity Theory

Prof. Albert Einstein Explains His Discovery, and Also Talks on His Mission to United States in Aid of Zionism

New York, New York

It is not surprising that Prof. Albert Einstein, who comes to the United States to promote the cause of a Jewish university in Jerusalem, prefers to devote newspaper interviews to that subject rather than his discovery of the theory of relativity. A glance at some of the so-called humor with which American newspapers presume to embellish the few things he has said of that theory here suggests one reason for his reluctance. And even in a moment’s stay in his apartments at the Hotel Commodore, where scores of Jews daily visit him and his associate, Dr. Chaim Weizmann, indicated that the university project as the chief purpose of his mission surrounds him with a mass of work.

The professor’s reasons for saying at once, when representative of The Christian Science Monitor called on him this week, that he did not wish to discuss the theory at all, were thoroughly understood; and this understanding made his subsequent consent to answer at least a few questions about the theory all the more gracious.

Conception of Matter

The first question was this:

“How does your theory affect our conceptions of the reality or unreality of matter?”

The question was repeated by the secretary in German, and the professor’s reply came promptly. Throughout the interview two characteristics of the man were illustrated. His replies came without hesitation and he seemed wholly oblivious to everything except the matter of the moment. His ideas were prepared to spring him forth freely and clearly and from the setting which called them for he shut out all alien disturbances. He was wholly bound up in the interview and yet curiously detached from it. Perhaps the only evidence of detachment was the frequency with which he gazed into the gray light of the morning. This, of course, was not valid evidence, and yet the impression of detachment was there. And this in spite of his obvious concentration and aloofness from his surroundings. His right hand, resting on the back of the secretary’s chair only moved from that position once or twice. His right knee remained crossed over his left throughout the interview, which stretched over about half an hour. At the beginning he faced his interviewers, thereafter turning only his hand toward the secretary. Without the least hint of affection, he had declined to use the only large upholstery arm-chair, sitting rather in an ordinary, straight-backed hotel chair, in the corner of the room farthest from the windows. Through them the gray day brought his kindly features into soft relief, and now and again a smile like a child’s illuminate his face. Behind the little group, the business of telephone ringing and discussions thrived at frequent intervals, and several times visitors burst into the small room unannounced. But only once did the professor seem to be conscious of any of this, and that was when he glanced up to smile a greeting to a friend.

So far as the philosophical conception of matter is concerned, the professor said that the theory of relativity did not change anything. They were beginning toward making use of the theory to introduce or deduce new ideas about the structure and composition of matter, more especially regarding its elemental particles, electrons, or what be called the nucleus of atoms. But these were only the newest experimental beginnings, and the theory itself did not alter the philosophical or classical conception of matter. For it concerned not matter itself, but time and space; or time and space, and not the contents of them.

New Basis for Thought

The professor was then asked if his theory did not give thinkers a new basis upon which to construct their conceptions of the cosmos.

To this the professor replied in the affirmative, in so far the theory altered the conception of time and space, and in so far as any conception of the universe depended on the conception of time and space and other cosmic forces such as gravitation.

Then, it was asked, was not the theory a fundamental discovery which must change the whole theory of the universe?

To some extent, the professor replied, this was true. Until now time and space had been conceived as somewhat independent of matter, as in independent frame or form whose contents included matter. But according to the theory of relativity, time and space appeared to be relationships of the mutual situations of different expressions of matter. Under this theory, there would always have to be conceded that matter was the basis upon which to estimate these relationships. And the natural laws governing the nature of this combination of relationships which is time and space depended upon an actual configuration of these relationships or matter, in a word, space was not an empty box, but the sum total of all relationships of its contents, and the nature of space altered according to these relationships. Hence space under this theory ceased to be uniform, constant, and permanent, and became dependent upon matter.

Special Relationships

Until now, the professor added, there had been all sorts of physical relationships, but in addition and above these there had been certain special and superior relationships, with a kind of priori significance, embracing all the others, and imposing themselves upon the whole physical realm. According to the theory of relativity, these special relationships were no longer of super-importance; their very existence was now conditional upon all the other physical relationships, and actually stood on the same level and basis with them, and not in a higher realm.

Next the professor was asked:

“As, under this theory our concepts of time and space change, and as new concepts become generally understood, are not our conceptions of the whole political, historical, and social structure and record of man likely to change also?”

When the secretary repeated this question the professor smiled. The answer was, on the whole, negative. The professor thought that the vital forces, social, political, and historical, would not be affected by such purely intellectual revolutionary ideas. And here he asked that no more questions about the theory be put.

Status of Zionism

Turning to the professor’s mission, he was asked whether Zionism as a world movement was not a thing of fundamental importance to world history.
The reply was that Zionism could not be considered as isolated from national movements. It had always been in the world, but in this period of history it was taking a very important place. Zionism should not be considered merely as a cause, but also as an effect.
The remark of a Jewish leader in Jerusalem, that Jews think on a place different from other people, that what constituted a nation is a type of thought, and that this is really what makes Zionism, was recalled by one to whom the remark had been made, and the professor was asked to discuss this phase of the subject.
He agreed to this conception of a nation and of the Jewish nation in particular. The Jews had many things in common which made them a nation; however, the national characteristics generally had been viewed differently in different periods of history. They had always been in the world, but they had been regarded as of differing values at different times.