.jpg?maxwidth=3840)
拍品 334
Albert Einstein (1879-1955)
Autograph letter signed ('A. Einstein') to Cornelius Lanczos, n.p., 9 October 1937
已结束2023年12月15日
成交价
GBP 10,080
更多信息
Albert Einstein (1879-1955)
Autograph letter signed ('A. Einstein') to Cornelius Lanczos, n.p., 9 October 1937
In German. One page, 280 x 216mm, including four mathematical equations. Provenance: Sotheby's, 26 November 1980, lot 160.
A critique of Lanczos's work on gravitational equations, using the 'vacuum field equation' Rik=0. 'It makes no sense to postulate the equation Rik=0...alongside your equation' (writing out the equation in question): Einstein points out that if one equation is fulfilled, the other necessarily is, and provides the reasoning, beginning with an equation including the term 'L' which represents 'a linear-homogenous Function'; if one performs a Bianchi operation on this, a further equation is produced, which proves Einstein's argument. The first equation therefore 'only makes sense on its own, i.e. without postulating Rik=O. This is in fact a generalisation of the old gravitational equations. However, it does not seem that this generalisation is an essential generalisation', as the necessary identities between the initial equations are lacking.
Autograph letter signed ('A. Einstein') to Cornelius Lanczos, n.p., 9 October 1937
In German. One page, 280 x 216mm, including four mathematical equations. Provenance: Sotheby's, 26 November 1980, lot 160.
A critique of Lanczos's work on gravitational equations, using the 'vacuum field equation' Rik=0. 'It makes no sense to postulate the equation Rik=0...alongside your equation' (writing out the equation in question): Einstein points out that if one equation is fulfilled, the other necessarily is, and provides the reasoning, beginning with an equation including the term 'L' which represents 'a linear-homogenous Function'; if one performs a Bianchi operation on this, a further equation is produced, which proves Einstein's argument. The first equation therefore 'only makes sense on its own, i.e. without postulating Rik=O. This is in fact a generalisation of the old gravitational equations. However, it does not seem that this generalisation is an essential generalisation', as the necessary identities between the initial equations are lacking.
Albert Einstein (1879-1955)
Autograph letter signed ('A. Einstein') to Cornelius Lanczos, n.p., 9 October 1937
In German. One page, 280 x 216mm, including four mathematical equations. Provenance: Sotheby's, 26 November 1980, lot 160.
A critique of Lanczos's work on gravitational equations, using the 'vacuum field equation' Rik=0. 'It makes no sense to postulate the equation Rik=0...alongside your equation' (writing out the equation in question): Einstein points out that if one equation is fulfilled, the other necessarily is, and provides the reasoning, beginning with an equation including the term 'L' which represents 'a linear-homogenous Function'; if one performs a Bianchi operation on this, a further equation is produced, which proves Einstein's argument. The first equation therefore 'only makes sense on its own, i.e. without postulating Rik=O. This is in fact a generalisation of the old gravitational equations. However, it does not seem that this generalisation is an essential generalisation', as the necessary identities between the initial equations are lacking.
Autograph letter signed ('A. Einstein') to Cornelius Lanczos, n.p., 9 October 1937
In German. One page, 280 x 216mm, including four mathematical equations. Provenance: Sotheby's, 26 November 1980, lot 160.
A critique of Lanczos's work on gravitational equations, using the 'vacuum field equation' Rik=0. 'It makes no sense to postulate the equation Rik=0...alongside your equation' (writing out the equation in question): Einstein points out that if one equation is fulfilled, the other necessarily is, and provides the reasoning, beginning with an equation including the term 'L' which represents 'a linear-homogenous Function'; if one performs a Bianchi operation on this, a further equation is produced, which proves Einstein's argument. The first equation therefore 'only makes sense on its own, i.e. without postulating Rik=O. This is in fact a generalisation of the old gravitational equations. However, it does not seem that this generalisation is an essential generalisation', as the necessary identities between the initial equations are lacking.