Einstein: His Life and Universe

3

. Ibid.

4

. Einstein to Max Born, Mar. 3, 1947, in Born 2005, 155 (not in AEA).

5

. Einstein to Erwin Schrodinger, June 19, 1935, AEA 22-47.

6

.

New York Times

, May 4 and 7, 1935; David Mermin, “My Life with Einstein,”

Physics Today

(Jan. 2005).

7

. Albert Einstein, Boris Podolsky, and Nathan Rosen, “Can Quantum-Mechanical Description of Physical Reality Be Regarded as Complete?,”

Physical Review

, May 15, 1935 (received Mar. 25, 1935); www.drchinese.com/David/EPR.pdf.

8

. Another formulation of the experiment would be for one observer to measure the position of a particle while at the “same moment” another observer measures the momentum of its twin. Then they compare notes and, supposedly, know the position and momentum of both particles. See Charles Seife, “The True and the Absurd,” in Brockman, 71.

9

. Aczel 2002, 117.

10

. Whitaker, 229; Aczel 2002, 118.

11

. Niels Bohr, “Can Quantum-Mechanical Description of Physical Reality Be Regarded as Complete?,”

Physical Review

, Oct. 15, 1935 (received July 13, 1935).

12

. Greene 2004, 102. Note that Arthur Fine says that the synopsis of EPR used by Bohr “is closer to a caricature of the EPR paper than it is to a serious reconstruction.” Fine says that Bohr and other interpreters of Einstein feature a “criterion of reality” that Einstein in his own later writings on EPR does not feature, even though the EPR paper as written by Podolsky does talk about determining “an element of reality.” Brian Greene’s book is among those that do emphasize the “criterion of reality” element. See Arthur Fine, “The Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Argument in Quantum Theory,”

Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy

, plato.stanford.edu/entries/qt-epr/, and also: Fine 1996, chapter 3; Mara Beller and Arthur Fine, “Bohr’s Response to EPR,” in Jann Faye and Henry Folse, eds.,

Niels Bohr and Contemporary Philosophy

(Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic, 1994), 1–31.

13

. Arthur Fine has shown that Einstein’s own critique of quantum mechanics

was not fully captured in the way that Podolsky wrote in the EPR paper, and especially in the way that Bohr and the “victors” described it. Don Howard has built on Fine’s work and emphasized the issues of “separability” and “locality.” See Howard 1990b.

14

. Einstein to Erwin Schrodinger, May 31, 1928, AEA 22-22; Fine, 18.

15

. Erwin Schrodinger to Einstein, June 7, 1935, AEA 22-45, and July 13, 1935, AEA 22-48.

16

. Einstein to Erwin Schrodinger, June 19, 1935, AEA 22-47.

17

. Erwin Schrodinger, “The Present Situation in Quantum Mechanics,” third installment, Dec. 13, 1935, www.tu- harburg.de/rzt/rzt/it/QM/cat.html.