Skip to main content
Go to accessibility options


    Albert Einstein Autograph Letter Signed "A.E." Two pages, 8.5" x 11", no place [Princeton]; April 15, 1950. Einstein replies to a letter from his friend, Michele Besso, shortly after his article "On the Generalized Theory of Gravitation" appeared in Scientific American. Written in German, Einstein speaks to a wide-range of topics, spanning religion to his Unified Field Theory, with equations from the theory written in his hand. He also pushes back against quantum and tries to tackle the issue of knowledge itself. A translation of the letter reads in full:

    "Dear Michele! The questions that you posed in your letter of 04/11 are completely natural but, for the time being, they cannot be answered. The reason for that is that no real definition of the field exists in a consistent theory of the field. It is true that, consequently, one ends up in a situation comparable to that of Don Quixote, since there is absolutely no guarantee that it will ever be possible to know whether the theory is 'true.' There exists no bridge a priori that could lead to empirical evidence. For instance, there is no such thing as a 'particle' in the strictest meaning of the word, because this does not fit in with the program of representing reality by functions that are everywhere continuous, even analytical. In theory, there exists, e.g., a symmetrical [handwritten equation]. There also exists a geodesic line for this. But in the first place, we have no reference point that might show that these lines possess any physical significance, not even approximately.

    It boils down to the fact that a comparison with the empirically known can only be expected from finding rigorous solutions to the system of equations, in which empirically 'known' constructs and their interactions are 'reflected.' Since this is tremendously difficult, it is easy to comprehend the contemporary physicists' skeptical attitude. For the moment, they clearly have the right to condemn my method as unproductive. But it will not be like that in the long run. They will see, very slowly, that you cannot get closer in depth to things with the quasi-empirical method. In order to really understand my conviction, you will have to turn over in your mind, again and again, my answer in the collective volume and the short article in Scientia. The question of 'causality' is not really the central one, but rather the question of real existence and the question of whether there exists any kind of strictly valid (not statistical) law for the theoretically represented reality. It is completely evident, that such laws do not exist for the observable facts. But the question is, is there a substitute for 'reality' as a theoretical program? Using your language, I would say: If the 'cloud' is not the expression of a singular fact, but only a 'probability cloud,' some thing with more characteristics must exist behind the cloud. Thinking that this is irrelevant for the theory seems to be fairly absurd. This is why people usually assert that the [handwritten symbol] function describes the individual case in its entirety and they only give up on this when one corners them on account of it.

    A certain mathematical question has occupied me lately. From an applicable variational principle there follows the compatibility of the system of equations [handwritten equations]. On the other hand, formal reflections force us in the direction of the stronger system, in which the last two of the equations are replaced by
    Rik = 0 16 equations.

    However, the compatibility of this stronger system is problematic; i.e., one does not know whether the multiplicity of one's solutions is sufficiently large. After many errors and much effort, I succeeded in proving this compatibility. Of course, this does not prove anything as to the 'truth' of the theory; but the most important formal counterargument to it has disappeared. There is one thing that I have learned in the course of a long life: It is devilishly difficult to get closer to 'Him', if one does not want to remain on the surface." Einstein's letter is accompanied by the original transmittal cover, postmarked from Princeton. Also accompanied by a four-page letter of reply from Besso.

    At the age of 71, Einstein was seeking to augment his Unified Field Theory, creating an umbrella theory for Special Relativity and Gravity, and was frustrated that "contemporary physicists" appeared content with theoretical abstractions without proving the equations underpinning them.

    Condition: Einstein letter has flattened mail folds. Clear and bold writing and signature. Other letter has flattened folds with minor toning. Envelope has usual wear and soiling.

    Auction Info

    Auction Dates
    April, 2020
    22nd Wednesday
    Bids + Registered Phone Bidders: 0
    Lot Tracking Activity: N/A
    Page Views: 2,350

    Buyer's Premium per Lot:
    25% on the first $300,000 (minimum $49), plus 20% of any amount between $300,000 and $3,000,000, plus 12.5% of any amount over $3,000,000 per lot.

    Sold on Apr 22, 2020 for: Sign-in or Join (free & quick)
    Track Item

    Heritage membership

    Join Now - It's Free

    1. Past Auction Values (prices, photos, full descriptions, etc.)
    2. Bid online
    3. Free Collector newsletter
    4. Want List with instant e-mail notifications
    5. Reduced auction commissions when you resell your
    Consign now
    • Cash Advances
    • More Bidders
    • Trusted Experts
    • Over 200,000 Satisfied Consignors Since 1976
    Consign to the 2022 June 11 - 12 Americana & Political Signature® Auction .

    Learn about consigning with us

    Heritage Auctions and Mr. Chad Reingold were...professional and courteous in all transactions and provided outstanding service in answering my many emails. I recommend them at the highest level.
    Killy M.,
    Melbourne Beach, FL
    View More Testimonials receives more traffic than any other auction house website. (Source:

    Video tutorial

    Getting the most out of search