Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 major objections 5 minor 91 references

Tachyons Before Tachyons: Lev Strum (1890-1936) and Superluminal Velocities

T0 review · 1 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read In a 1923 paper, Lev Strum argued that faster-than-light signals do not break special relativity because the direction of time is itself relative.

desk verdict A careful, well-sourced rescue of a forgotten minor figure; the anticipation claim is modest and already hedged, so the main interpretive worry is smaller than it looks. read the letter →

arxiv 2504.18347 v1 pith:DM6KDHIQ submitted 2025-04-25 physics.hist-ph

Helge Kragh This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.hist-ph PACS 01.65.+g03.30.+p
keywords LevStrumsuperluminalsignalstachyonreinterpretationprinciplespecialrelativitycausalityhistoryofphysicsSovietfaster-than-lightparticles
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper argues that the Ukrainian physicist Lev Strum, in a 1923 article in Zeitschrift für Physik, made a conceptual move that later became the core of tachyon physics. He claimed that within special relativity a signal moving faster than light does not necessarily violate causality, because the direction of time is relative: an event that is 'before' a later event in one inertial frame can be 'after' it in another. The paper presents Strum's argument as an early version of the reinterpretation principle adopted by tachyon physicists in the 1960s, while stressing that Strum claimed only theoretical possibility, not physical existence, for such signals. It also reconstructs Strum's biography and argues that his neglect was scientific rather than political, even though he was executed during Stalin's terror. The payoff is that a key idea of faster-than-light physics turns out to be four decades older than the standard account, and the real scientist behind it had survived only as a character in a novel.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing device is Strum's space-time diagram of two inertial frames: a superluminal event lies outside the light cone, and in a moving frame $S'$ its time coordinate changes sign, reversing the apparent direction of time. This sign flip converts the causality objection from a contradiction into a frame-dependent description: what looks like an effect before its cause in one frame can be re-described as an ordinary cause-before-effect process in another. The same geometric fact, the non-invariance of temporal order outside the light cone, is what the paper uses to connect Strum to the later reinterpretation principle.

What would settle it

Read Strum's 1923 article in full and re-derive his two-frame argument: if it stops at showing that different observers assign opposite time coordinates to a superluminal event, without the further step of re-describing a backward-in-time signal as a forward-in-time one, then the claim that he anticipated the reinterpretation principle is refuted.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Strum's 1923 analysis considered two inertial systems $S$ and $S'$, with $S'$ moving at a subluminal velocity relative to $S$, and a superluminal signal leaving the common origin in both directions. He found that the signal's time coordinate is negative in $S'$ while positive in $S$, and he drew two conclusions: the hypothesis of superluminal velocities does not contradict the special theory of relativity, and the direction of time is itself relative, since what is before a later event in one system may be after that event in another. In a 1926 follow-up he added that effect always follows cause within a given frame, but which event counts as cause and which as effect can differ between frames; a superluminal signal sent 'back in time' can therefore be reinterpreted as a signal moving forward in time. The paper identifies this as a version of the reinterpretation principle of tachyon physics and is explicit that Strum did not claim tachyons exist: he never considered massive superluminal particles, imaginary mass, detection, or crossing the light barrier, and his faster-than-light signals belonged to a world causally disconnected from the ordinary one.

Load-bearing premise

The case depends on reading Strum's 1923 argument that the direction of time is relative as the same intellectual move as the later reinterpretation principle; if he meant only that different observers order events differently, and not that a backward-in-time signal can be re-described as a forward-in-time signal, the historical claim loses its basis.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the paper is right, the reinterpretation principle, usually dated to tachyon physics of the 1960s, has a documented 1923 predecessor, so the conceptual history of faster-than-light motion must be rewritten.
  • Strum's published conclusion that superluminal signals are compatible with special relativity shows that at least some physicists in the 1920s did not regard Einstein's and Tolman's causality argument as decisive.
  • Strum's explicit refusal to assert the existence of such signals, and his silence on detection and on imaginary-mass particles, means the tachyon searches of the 1960s-1980s cannot claim him as a proponent of physical tachyons.
  • Because Strum's relativity papers appeared in mainstream German journals, their neglect cannot be explained by Soviet censorship alone; the paper's account points to simple lack of scientific interest.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Because Strum and Robert Bass reached similar conclusions independently in the 1920s, a systematic census of other early relativity papers might find further independent versions of the time-reversal move, which would turn a single anticipation into a broader forgotten strand of interpretation.
  • The same logical objections that later physicists and philosophers raised against the tachyon reinterpretation principle apply retroactively to Strum's 1923 formulation; testing his argument against a closed-causal-loop scenario would show whether his anticipation was robust or only apparent.
  • A full-text search of Soviet and Ukrainian physics journals from 1921 to 1940 could test the paper's claim of total oblivion, since standard citation databases omit local-language publications and the paper notes that its usual sources show little or no trace of Strum's work.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

1 major / 5 minor

Summary. This manuscript reconstructs the pre-history of tachyon physics, with special attention to the Kyiv physicist Lev Strum. It reviews pre-relativistic and Einstein-era discussions of superluminal velocities, Tolman's causality paradox, the 1960s-1980s tachyon episode, and then presents a biographical and conceptual account of Strum's 1923 Zeitschrift für Physik paper and related articles from 1926 and 1930, in which Strum argued that superluminal signals do not contradict special relativity and that time order and cause-effect relations are frame-dependent. The paper also covers Strum's execution during Stalin's terror, his posthumous rehabilitation, and his alleged literary afterlife as Viktor Strum in Grossman's Life and Fate. The author explicitly denies that Strum proposed physical tachyons or considered massive superluminal particles.

Significance. If accurate, the paper gives a valuable corrective to the standard claim that superluminal-velocity questions were largely abandoned between about 1905 and 1960. It brings to light an obscure but real figure and separates the documented physics from doubtful biographical anecdotes; the footnotes carefully flag unreliable sources, including the Einstein-meeting story and the Grossman identification. The paper is strongest where it stays close to published sources and is appropriately cautious about retrospective labels. The main risk is that the 'reinterpretation principle' attribution in Section 7 goes beyond what the quoted Strum texts demonstrate, but this is a fixable issue rather than a fatal flaw.

major comments (1)
  1. [Section 7 (Strum 1923/1926, refs. [79] and [81])] The paper's attribution of a 'version of the reinterpretation principle' to Strum is not fully supported by the quoted material. In Section 2 the reinterpretation principle is defined as the reinterpretation of negative-energy emission as positive-energy absorption, but all quoted Strum passages concern the relativity of time order and of cause-effect labels; no passage in which Strum discusses energy is reproduced. Because the title and the announcement of the paper's novelty depend on this attribution, please either reproduce the relevant original text (with translation) showing that Strum's argument goes beyond coordinate time reversal, or explicitly characterize it as a kinematic precursor and adjust the wording in Section 7 and the abstract accordingly.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 5, paragraph on Strum's publications] The word 'Uspkekhi' in the sentence about Strum's contribution to Uspekhi Fizicheskikh Nauk is a typo and should read 'Uspekhi.'
  2. [Section 8, opening paragraph] The statement that Grossman 'published in 1960 the novel Life and Fate' is inaccurate; the novel was completed in 1960 but first published much later, in the West in 1980 and in the Soviet Union in 1988, so the text should say 'completed in 1960' or equivalent.
  3. [Reference [69]] The title of Strum's 1928 paper contains the misspelling 'charachterische' and should read 'charakteristische.'
  4. [Section 8, paragraph on Brecht] The name 'Bertold Brecht' should be 'Bertolt Brecht.'
  5. [Section 7, paragraph on citation records] The statement that Google Scholar reports no citations to Strum's 1923 paper in 1923-1940 could usefully be qualified, since Google Scholar's coverage of that period is incomplete and the claim may be read as stronger than the data support.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the historical claim is reconstructed from external primary and secondary sources and does not reduce to its own inputs.

full rationale

This is a history-of-physics paper, not a derivation. The central claim is that Strum's 1923 Zeitschrift für Physik article argued superluminal signals do not contradict special relativity and that the causality objection can be answered by the relativity of time order. That claim is supported by direct quotations from Strum's papers [79], [81], [82] and by the independent secondary literature [3], [80]. The asserted connection to the later tachyon reinterpretation principle is explicitly hedged as 'This has been seen as a version of the reinterpretation principle' and is attributed to Malykin et al., not to the author's own prior work. The paper also resists the stronger anticipation thesis, stating that 'the claim that Strum "suggested the existence of tachyons" lacks justification.' The author's self-citations (Kragh 2011, 2019, 2022, and others) appear only as contextual references or as earlier mentions of Strum; none of them supplies a premise that forces the paper's conclusion. No fitted parameter is relabeled as a prediction, and no uniqueness theorem or ansatz is imported from the author's previous publications. The main interpretive risk, namely that Strum's coordinate-time reversal may not be identical to the modern negative-energy reinterpretation principle, is a question of historical evidence, not circularity, and the paper's own cautious wording anticipates it. The verdict is therefore no significant circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No mathematical model or numerical fit is involved. The free-parameter list is empty. The axioms capture source-reliability assumptions and the relativity background used to interpret Strum's historical argument.

assumptions (3)
  • standard math Special relativity kinematics, including the Lorentz transformation and light-cone structure, correctly describes Strum's 1923 analysis.
    The assessment that Strum anticipated the reinterpretation principle depends on taking his space-time argument as coherent relativity physics rather than a confused coordinate mistake.
  • domain assumption The secondary sources Malykin et al. 2012 and Koltachikhina 2008 accurately represent Strum's biography and papers.
    The biography in Section 5 and the account of Strum's argument in Section 7 rest on these sources, one of which is not independently checked against Strum's original documents.
  • domain assumption Grossman's novel can be used as evidence for Strum's afterlife, even though the identification of Viktor Strum with Lev Strum is contested.
    The literary resurrection claim depends on the same contested assumption; the paper flags this in footnote 15 but still uses the novel as a central part of the narrative.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Tachyons Before Tachyons: Lev Strum (1890-1936) and Superluminal Velocities." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/DM6KDHIQ

@misc{pith2026250418347,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Tachyons Before Tachyons: Lev Strum (1890-1936) and Superluminal Velocities},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/DM6KDHIQ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2504.18347}
}
read the original abstract

No particle or signal carrying information can travel at a speed exceeding that of light in vacuum. Although this has for a long time been accepted as a law of nature, prior to Einstein's 1905 theory of special relativity the possibility of superluminal motion of electrons was widely discussed by Arnold Sommerfeld and other physicists. Besides, it is not obvious that special relativity rules out such motion under all circumstances. From approximately 1965 to 1985 the hypothesis of tachyons moving faster than light was seriously entertained by a minority of physicists. This paper reviews the early history concerning superluminal signals and pays particular attention to the ideas proposed in the 1920s by the little known Ukrainian physicist Lev Strum (Shtrum). As he pointed out in a paper of 1923, within the framework of relativity it is possible for a signal to move superluminally without violating the law of causality. Part of this article is devoted to the personal and scientific biography of the undeservedly neglected Strum, whose career was heavily and eventually fatally influenced by the political situation in Stalin's Russia. Remarkably, to the limited extent that Strum is known today, it is as a literary figure in a novel and not as a real person.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

91 extracted references · 80 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Special Relativity and Motions Faster than Light (Weinheim: Wiley- VCH Verlag)

    Fayngold, Moses (2002). Special Relativity and Motions Faster than Light (Weinheim: Wiley- VCH Verlag)

    2002

  2. [2]

    Higher Speculations: Grand Theories and Failed Revolutions in Physics and Cosmology (Oxford: Oxford University Press)

    Kragh, Helge (2011). Higher Speculations: Grand Theories and Failed Revolutions in Physics and Cosmology (Oxford: Oxford University Press)

    2011

  3. [3]

    Lev Yakovlevich Strum and the hypothesis of the existence of tachyons,

    Malykin, G.B., V.S. Savchuk, and E.A. Romanets (2012). “Lev Yakovlevich Strum and the hypothesis of the existence of tachyons,” Physics—Uspekhi 55: 1134-1139

    2012

  4. [4]

    Possibility of faster-than-light particles,

    Feinberg, Gerald (1967). “Possibility of faster-than-light particles,” Physical Review 159: 1089-1105

    1967

  5. [5]

    Miller, Arthur I. (1981). Albert Einstein’s Special Theory of Relativity (Reading, MA: Addison- Wesley Publishing)

    1981

  6. [6]

    Particles beyond the light barrier,

    Bilaniuk, Olexa-Myron and E.C. George Sudarshan (1969). “Particles beyond the light barrier,” Physics Today 22 (May): 43-51

    1969

  7. [7]

    Oxford English Dictionary, online https:// www.oed. com/

  8. [8]

    The Logic of Scientific Discovery (New York: Basic Books)

    Popper, Karl (1959). The Logic of Scientific Discovery (New York: Basic Books)

    1959

Show all 91 references
  1. [9]

    The Names of Science: Terminology and Language in the History of the Natural Sciences (Oxford: Oxford University Press)

    Kragh, Helge (2024). The Names of Science: Terminology and Language in the History of the Natural Sciences (Oxford: Oxford University Press)

    2024

  2. [10]

    ’Meta’ relativity,

    Bilaniuk, Olexa-Myron M., V.K. Deshpande, and E.C. George Sudarshan (1962). “’Meta’ relativity,” American Journal of Physics 30: 718-723

    1962

  3. [11]

    Short bibliography on faster-than-light particles (tachyons),

    Feldman, Laurence M. (1974). “Short bibliography on faster-than-light particles (tachyons),” American Journal of Physics 42: 179-182

    1974

  4. [12]

    Perepelitsa, V.P. (1980). Comment on Full Bibliography on Faster-Than-Light Particles (Moscow: Institute of Theoretical and Experimental Physics, 1980). Available online: https://inis.iaea.org/records/xbsqa-e0h57

    1980

  5. [13]

    Lovejoy, Arthur O. (1936). The Great Chain of Being: A Study of the History of an Idea (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press)

    1936

  6. [14]

    ”Physics and the totalitarian principle.” http://arxiv.org/abs/1907.14623

    Kragh, Helge (2019). ”Physics and the totalitarian principle.” http://arxiv.org/abs/1907.14623

    2019

  7. [15]

    Spence, John C.H. (2020). Lightspeed: The Ghostly Æther and the Race to Measure the Speed of Light (Oxford: Oxford University Press)

    2020

  8. [16]

    Gillispie, Charles C. (2000). Pierre-Simon Laplace, 1749-1827: A Life in Exact Science (Princeton: Princeton University Press)

    2000

  9. [17]

    Quantum Generations: A History of Physics in the Twentieth Century (Princeton: Princeton University Press)

    Kragh, Helge (1999). Quantum Generations: A History of Physics in the Twentieth Century (Princeton: Princeton University Press)

    1999

  10. [18]

    Intellectual Mastery of Nature: Theoretical Physics from Ohm to Einstein (Chicago: University of Chicago Press)

    Jungnickel, Christa and Russell McCormmach (1986). Intellectual Mastery of Nature: Theoretical Physics from Ohm to Einstein (Chicago: University of Chicago Press)

    1986

  11. [19]

    Sopka, Katherine R., ed. (1986). Physics for a New Century: Papers Presented at the 1904 St. Louis Congress (New York: American Institute of Physics). 22

    1986

  12. [20]

    Historical background of the tachyon concept,

    Fröman, Per O. (1994). “Historical background of the tachyon concept,” Archive for History of Exact Sciences 48: 373-380

    1994

  13. [21]

    Electromagnetic Theory, Vol

    Heaviside, Oliver (2012). Electromagnetic Theory, Vol. 3 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press)

    2012

  14. [22]

    Nahin, Paul J. (1988). Oliver Heaviside: Sage in Solitude (New York: IEEE Press)

    1988

  15. [23]

    Oliver Heaviside: An accidental time traveler,

    Nahin, Paul J. (2018). “Oliver Heaviside: An accidental time traveler,” Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. A 376: 20170448

    2018

  16. [24]

    On the steady motion of an electrified ellipsoid,

    Searle, George F.C. (1897). “On the steady motion of an electrified ellipsoid,” Philosophical Magazine 44: 329-341

  17. [25]

    Arnold Sommerfeld und die Überlichtgeschwindigkeit,

    Debye, Peter (1960). “Arnold Sommerfeld und die Überlichtgeschwindigkeit,” Physikalische Blätter 16: 568-570

    1960

  18. [26]

    Physics in the shadow of mathematics: The Göttingen electron- theory seminar of 1905,

    Pyenson, Lewis (1979). “Physics in the shadow of mathematics: The Göttingen electron- theory seminar of 1905,” Archive for History of Exact Sciences 21: 55-89

    1979

  19. [27]

    Eckert, Michael and Karl Märker, eds. (2000). Arnold Sommerfeld Wissenschaftlicher Briefwechsel, Band 1: 1892-1918 (Berlin: Verlag für Geschichte der Naturwissenschaften und Technik)

    2000

  20. [28]

    “Bemerkungen zur Bewegungen der Elektronen bei Ueberlichtgeschwindigkeit,“ Nachrichten von der Gesellschaft zu Göttingen, Math.-Phys

    Wiechert, Emil (1905). “Bemerkungen zur Bewegungen der Elektronen bei Ueberlichtgeschwindigkeit,“ Nachrichten von der Gesellschaft zu Göttingen, Math.-Phys. Klasse, 75-82

    1905

  21. [29]

    Mulligan, Joseph F. (2001). “Emil Wiechert (1861-1928): Esteemed seismologist, forgotten physicist,“ American Journal of Physics 69: 277-287

    2001

  22. [30]

    Zur Elektrodynamik bewegter Körper,

    Einstein, Albert (1905). “Zur Elektrodynamik bewegter Körper,” Annalen der Physik 17: 891-921

    1905

  23. [31]

    ”Die vom Relativitätsprinzip geforderte Trägheit der Energie,” Annalen der Physik 23: 371-384

    Einstein, Albert (1907). ”Die vom Relativitätsprinzip geforderte Trägheit der Energie,” Annalen der Physik 23: 371-384

    1907

  24. [32]

    The Collected Papers of Albert Einstein, Vol

    Einstein, Albert (1990). The Collected Papers of Albert Einstein, Vol. 2. The Swiss Years: Writings, 1900-1909, eds. John Stachel, David C. Cassidy, Jürgen Renn and Robert Schulmann (Princeton: Princeton University Press)

    1990

  25. [33]

    “Über das Relativitätsprinzip und die aus demselben gezogenen Folgerungen,“ Jahrbuch der Radioaktivität und Elektronik 4: 411-462

    Einstein, Albert (1907). “Über das Relativitätsprinzip und die aus demselben gezogenen Folgerungen,“ Jahrbuch der Radioaktivität und Elektronik 4: 411-462

    1907

  26. [34]

    The Collected Papers of Albert Einstein, Vol

    Einstein, Albert (1993). The Collected Papers of Albert Einstein, Vol. 5. The Swiss Years: Correspondence, 1902-1914, eds. Martin J. Klein, A. J. Kox and Robert Schulmann (Princeton: Princeton University Press)

    1993

  27. [35]

    The Evolution of Physics: The Growth of Ideas from Early Concepts to Relativity and Quanta (New York: Simon and Schuster)

    Einstein, Albert and Leopold Infeld (1942). The Evolution of Physics: The Growth of Ideas from Early Concepts to Relativity and Quanta (New York: Simon and Schuster)

    1942

  28. [36]

    A satire on the principle of relativity,

    Gilbert, Leo (1914). “A satire on the principle of relativity,” The Monist 24: 288-309

    1914

  29. [37]

    Das Relativitätsprinzip, die jüngste Modenarrheit der Wissenschaft (Brackwede: W

    Gilbert, Leo (1914). Das Relativitätsprinzip, die jüngste Modenarrheit der Wissenschaft (Brackwede: W. Breitenbach)

    1914

  30. [38]

    Einstein’s Opponents: The Public Controversy about the Theory of Relativity in the 1920s (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press)

    Wazeck, Milena (2014). Einstein’s Opponents: The Public Controversy about the Theory of Relativity in the 1920s (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press). 23

    2014

  31. [39]

    Wildon et al

    Carr, H. Wildon et al. (1911). ”Symposium: The time difficulty in realist theories of perception,” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 12: 124-187

    1911

  32. [40]

    Tolman, Richard C. (1917). The Theory of the Relativity of Motion (Berkeley: University of California Press)

    1917

  33. [41]

    Tolman, Richard C. (1934). Relativity, Thermodynamics and Cosmology (Oxford: Oxford University Press)

    1934

  34. [42]

    The tachyonic antitelephone,

    Benford, Gregory A., Book, D.L., and W.A. Newcomb (1970). “The tachyonic antitelephone,” Physical Review D 2: 263-265

    1970

  35. [43]

    A famous relativity limerick,

    (No author). “A famous relativity limerick,” Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society of Canada 32 (1938), 95

    1938

  36. [44]

    and Carol C

    Friedman, Alan J. and Carol C. Donley (1985). Einstein as Myth and Muse (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press)

    1985

  37. [45]

    Die Idee der Relativitätstheorie (Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag)

    Thirring, Hans (1922). Die Idee der Relativitätstheorie (Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag)

    1922

  38. [46]

    The Theory of Relativity (Oxford: Clarendon Press)

    Møller, Christian (1952). The Theory of Relativity (Oxford: Clarendon Press)

    1952

  39. [47]

    Soviet Marxism and Natural Science, 1917-1932 (London: Routledge)

    Joravsky, David (1961). Soviet Marxism and Natural Science, 1917-1932 (London: Routledge)

    1961

  40. [48]

    Graham, Loren R. (1972). Science and Philosophy in the Soviet Union (New York: Alfred A. Knopf)

    1972

  41. [49]

    and Victor Ya

    Gorelik, Gennady E. and Victor Ya. Frenkel (1994). Matvei Petrovich Bronstein and Soviet Theoretical Physics in the Thirties (Basel: Birkhäuser Verlag)

    1994

  42. [50]

    Einstein and Soviet Ideology (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press)

    Vucinich, Alexander (2001). Einstein and Soviet Ideology (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press)

    2001

  43. [51]

    Balashov, Yuri and Vladimir Vizgin, eds., Einstein Studies in Russia (Boston: Birkhäuser)

  44. [52]

    Kojevnikov, Alexei B. (2004). Stalin’s Great Science: The Times and Adventures of Soviet Physicists (Singapore: Imperial College Press)

    2004

  45. [53]

    Lev Yakovlevich Strum – a forgotten name of Ukrainian science,

    Koltachikhina, O. Yu. (2008). “Lev Yakovlevich Strum – a forgotten name of Ukrainian science,” Nauka Naukoznavstvo (Science and Science of Science) 164, no. 4: 164-168 (in Ukrainian)

    2008

  46. [54]

    World physics in Ukraine: A unique experience of scientists at Kharkiv Research Center of Physics (1920s-1930s),

    Tverytnykova, Elena and Maryna Gutnyk (2022). “World physics in Ukraine: A unique experience of scientists at Kharkiv Research Center of Physics (1920s-1930s),” Acta Baltica Historiae et Philosophiae Scientiarum 10: 5-23

    2022

  47. [55]

    Lev Landau, Ukraine, Kharkiv, UITP,

    Tan’shyna, A. (2018). “Lev Landau, Ukraine, Kharkiv, UITP,” Ukrainian Journal of Physics 63: 81-92

    2018

  48. [56]

    One handshake away from Albert Einstein

    Gordon, Alexander (2022). “One handshake away from Albert Einstein.” https://www.sdjewishworld.com/2022/08/12/one-handshake-away-from-albert-einstein/

    2022

  49. [57]

    “Kyiv, Malopidvalnaya street, 12,“ in Russian

    Dettmer, Tatiana (2018). “Kyiv, Malopidvalnaya street, 12,“ in Russian. https://www.poslednyadres.ru/news/news622.htm

    2018

  50. [58]

    An undulatory theory of the mechanics of atoms and molecules,

    Schrödinger, Erwin (1926). “An undulatory theory of the mechanics of atoms and molecules,” Physical Review 28: 1049-1070

    1926

  51. [59]

    Swenson, Loyd S. (1972). The Ethereal Aether: A History of the Michelson-Morley-Miller Aether-Drift Experiments, 1880-1930 (Austin, TX: University of Texas Press). 24

    1972

  52. [60]

    Einstein’s attitude towards experiments: Testing relativity theory 1907-1927,

    Hentschel, Klaus (1992). “Einstein’s attitude towards experiments: Testing relativity theory 1907-1927,” Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 23: 593-624

    1992

  53. [61]

    Einstein’s Jury: The Race to Test Relativity (Princeton: Princeton University Press)

    Crelinsten, Jeffrey (2006). Einstein’s Jury: The Race to Test Relativity (Princeton: Princeton University Press)

    2006

  54. [62]

    Versuch einer Hypothese zur Deutung der letzten Resultate des Michelsonsche Versuches,

    Strum, Lev (1924). “Versuch einer Hypothese zur Deutung der letzten Resultate des Michelsonsche Versuches,” Zeitschrift für Physik 24: 20-23

    1924

  55. [63]

    “Über die Abhängigkeit der Intensität der Spektrallinien vom Gasdruck,“ Zeitschrift für Physik 18: 372-378

    Strum, Lev (1923). “Über die Abhängigkeit der Intensität der Spektrallinien vom Gasdruck,“ Zeitschrift für Physik 18: 372-378

    1923

  56. [64]

    Niels Bohr and the Quantum Atom: The Bohr Model of Atomic Structure 1913-1925 (Oxford: Oxford University Press)

    Kragh, Helge (2012). Niels Bohr and the Quantum Atom: The Bohr Model of Atomic Structure 1913-1925 (Oxford: Oxford University Press)

    2012

  57. [65]

    “Über eine mögliche Verallgemeinerung der Planckschen Strahlungsformel,“ Zeitschrift für Physik 51: 287-291

    Strum, Lev (1928). “Über eine mögliche Verallgemeinerung der Planckschen Strahlungsformel,“ Zeitschrift für Physik 51: 287-291

    1928

  58. [66]

    Birge, Raymond T. (1929). “Probable values of the general physical constants,“ Reviews of Modern Physics 1: 1-73

    1929

  59. [67]

    ”A generalized form of the new statistics,” Physical Review 34: 1204-1211

    Chandrasekhar, Subrahmanyan (1929). ”A generalized form of the new statistics,” Physical Review 34: 1204-1211

    1929

  60. [68]

    Strum, Lev (1926)."Zur Stabilität der Atomkerne,“ Zeitschrift für physikalische Chemie 119: 368-376

    1926

  61. [69]

    “Massendefekt und charachterische Kerngrössen,“ Zeitschrift für Physik 50: 555-558

    Strum, Lev (1928). “Massendefekt und charachterische Kerngrössen,“ Zeitschrift für Physik 50: 555-558

    1928

  62. [70]

    Binding energies of the neutron and the proton,

    Strum, Lev (1934). “Binding energies of the neutron and the proton,” Nature 134: 497-498

    1934

  63. [71]

    Interaction of neutrons and protons,

    Ivanenko, Dmitrii (1934). “Interaction of neutrons and protons,” Nature 133: 981-982

    1934

  64. [72]

    Stuewer, Roger H. (2018). The Age of Innocence: Nuclear Physics Between the First and Second World Wars (Oxford: Oxford University Press)

    2018

  65. [73]

    Vasily Grossman and the Soviet Century (New Haven: Yale University Press)

    Popoff, Alexandra (2019). Vasily Grossman and the Soviet Century (New Haven: Yale University Press)

    2019

  66. [74]

    Reinders, Lodewijk J. (2018). The Life, Science and Times of Lev Vasilevich Shubnikov (Cham, Switzerland: Springer)

    2018

  67. [75]

    Stalingrad (London: Vintage Classics)

    Grossman, Vasily (2019). Stalingrad (London: Vintage Classics)

    2019

  68. [76]

    Life and Fate (New York: Everyman’s Library)

    Grossman, Vasily (2022). Life and Fate (New York: Everyman’s Library)

    2022

  69. [77]

    Vasily Grossman and the plight of Soviet Jewish scientists: The tragic tale of the physicist Lev Shtrum

    Popoff, Alexandra and Tatiana Dettmer (2019). “Vasily Grossman and the plight of Soviet Jewish scientists: The tragic tale of the physicist Lev Shtrum.” https://lithub.com/vasily-grossman-and-the-plight-of-soviet-jewish-scientists/

    2019

  70. [78]

    Brock, William H. (1985). From Protyle to Proton: William Prout and the Nature of Matter, 1785-1985 (Bristol: Adam Hilger)

    1985

  71. [79]

    “Zur Frage nach der Überlichtgeschwindigkeit in der speziellen Relativitätstheorie,“ Zeitschrift für Physik 20: 36-44

    Strum, Lev (1923). “Zur Frage nach der Überlichtgeschwindigkeit in der speziellen Relativitätstheorie,“ Zeitschrift für Physik 20: 36-44

    1923

  72. [80]

    Superluminal motion (review),

    Malykin, G.B. and E.A. Romanets (2012). “Superluminal motion (review),” Optics and Spectroscopy 112: 920-934

    2012

  73. [81]

    “Überlichtgeschwindigkeit und Relativitätstheorie,“ Physikalische Zeitschrift 27: 541-544

    Strum, Lev (1926). “Überlichtgeschwindigkeit und Relativitätstheorie,“ Physikalische Zeitschrift 27: 541-544. 25

    1926

  74. [82]

    “Die Phasengeschwindigkeit in der Kinematik der Relativitätstheorie,“ Zeitschrift für Physik 60: 405-409

    Strum, Lev (1930). “Die Phasengeschwindigkeit in der Kinematik der Relativitätstheorie,“ Zeitschrift für Physik 60: 405-409

    1930

  75. [83]

    Friedmann, Alexander A. (1922). “Über die Krümmung des Raumes,“ Zeitschrift für Physik 10: 377-386

    1922

  76. [84]

    Frenkel, and Artyr D

    Tropp, Eduard A., Viktor Ya. Frenkel, and Artyr D. Chernin, Alexander A. Friedmann: The Man Who Made the Universe Expand (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press)

  77. [85]

    Über das spezielle Relativitätsprinzip und die Grenzgeschwindigkeit,

    Bass, Robert (1926). “Über das spezielle Relativitätsprinzip und die Grenzgeschwindigkeit,” Physikalische Zeitschrift 27: 74-79

    1926

  78. [86]

    Signal und Gegensignal mit Überlichtgeschwindigkeit,

    Würschmidt, Josef (1927). “Signal und Gegensignal mit Überlichtgeschwindigkeit,” Physikalische Zeitschrift 28: 809-812

    1927

  79. [87]

    “Relativity 4-ever?“ Physics 4: 421-439

    Chashchina, Olga and Zurab Silagadze (2022). “Relativity 4-ever?“ Physics 4: 421-439

    2022

  80. [88]

    “Brecht, Galileo, and Møller: A view from Copenhagen, 1938-1939,“ Physics in Perspective 24: 99-124

    Kragh, Helge (2022). “Brecht, Galileo, and Møller: A view from Copenhagen, 1938-1939,“ Physics in Perspective 24: 99-124

    2022

  81. [89]

    Gauthier, Daniel J. (2009). “Superluminal communication in quantum mechanics.“ In Daniel Greenberger, Klaus Hentschel and Friedel Weinert, eds., Compendium of Quantum Physics: Concepts, Experiments, History and Philosophy , 766-769 (Berlin: Springer)

    2009

  82. [90]

    String theory and tachyons,

    Sen, Ashoke (2001). “String theory and tachyons,” Current Science 81: 1561-1567

    2001

  83. [91]

    Letters to father, wife and last love: Vasilii Grossman’s epistolary legacy,

    Krasnikova, Anna and Julia Volokhova (2024). “Letters to father, wife and last love: Vasilii Grossman’s epistolary legacy,” L’Analisi Linguistica e Letteraria 31: 5-24

    2024

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.