Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

Bryce DeWitt letter to John Wheeler 20-April-1967

Bryce Seligman DeWitt

Published May 19, 2011• 0 citations
OpenAlex

Abstract

In 1967, Bryce DeWitt published a three part essay, called "Quantum Theory of Gravitation." He sent a preprint of the first part to Wheeler for his comments. This is DeWitt's reply to Wheeler's comments. It is notable because DeWitt mentions Everett, Bohr, Rosenfeld, and Wheeler's companion to Everett's paper.

Related papers

Hugh Everett handwritten draft letter to Bryce S. DeWitt, 31-May-1957

Everett, Hugh

As a close friend and collaborator of J.A. Wheeler's, Bryce S. DeWitt was one of the first people to see a draft of the short version of Hugh Everett's thesis (he did not read the longer version until much later, as is evidenced by some of the complaints in this letter). In May 1957, DeWitt wrote a long and thoughtful letter to Wheeler about how Everett's theory had conceptual parallels with Einstein's theory of general relativity. At the end of that month, Everett sent his reply. This document is a handwritten draft/outline of the letter that Everett ultimately sent.

•May 31, 1957•0 citations

Bryce DeWitt letter to John Wheeler, 19-September-1979

Bryce Seligman DeWitt

As Hugh Everett's interpretation gained more notoriety in the wake of the DeWitt-Graham anthology, Wheeler began to distance himself from his former student. Here, DeWitt and Wheeler have reversed their earlier positions: DeWitt finds himself defending Everett's interpretation against Wheeler, who seems to have taken Bohr's side in a previous letter to DeWitt.

•Sep 19, 1979•0 citations

Bryce S. DeWitt letter to John Wheeler, Wheeler's copy, 07-May-1957

Bryce Seligman DeWitt

As a close friend and collaborator of John Wheeler's, Bryce DeWitt was one of the first people to see a draft of the short version of Hugh Everett's thesis (he did not read the longer version until much later, as is evidenced by some of the complaints in this letter). In May 1957, DeWitt wrote a long and thoughtful letter to Wheeler about how Everett's theory had conceptual parallels with Einstein's theory of general relativity. Wheeler promptly forwarded a copy of the letter to Everett. DeWitt was unhappy with both wave function collapse and the Copenhagen Interpretation. He wrote that Everett's formalistic argument for pure wave mechanics was "beautifully consistent''. But he could not accept the ontological ramifications of the theory because, "I simply do not branch.'' This document is the original letter, as saved by Wheeler. It includes several sentences on the bottom of page 4 that were cut off when Wheeler's secretary reproduced the letter for Everett.

•May 7, 1957•0 citations

Hugh Everett letter to Bryce S. DeWitt, 31-May-1957

Hugh Everett

As a close friend and collaborator of Wheeler's, DeWitt was one of the first people to see a draft of the short version of Everett's thesis (he did not read the longer version until much later, as is evidenced by some of the complaints in this letter). In May 1957, DeWitt wrote a long and thoughtful letter to Wheeler about how Everett's theory had conceptual parallels with Einstein's theory of general relativity. At the end of that month, Everett sent his reply. This document is a copy of the letter that Everett sent. In response to DeWitt's insistence that he has direct introspective evidence that he does not split, Everett draws an analogy with anti-Copernicans, who argued that they had direct evidence that the world did not move. Based on much later remarks, it seems that DeWitt was convinced by Everett's rejoinder.

•May 19, 2011•0 citations

Bryce S. DeWitt letter to J.A. Wheeler, Hugh Everett's copy, 07-May-1957

Bryce Seligman DeWitt

As a close friend and collaborator of John Wheeler's, Bryce S. DeWitt was one of the first people to see a draft of the short version of Hugh Everett's thesis (he did not read the longer version until much later, as is evidenced by some of the complaints in this letter). In May 1957, DeWitt wrote a long and thoughtful letter to Wheeler about how Everett's theory had conceptual parallels with Einstein's theory of general relativity. Wheeler promptly forwarded a copy of the letter to Everett. DeWitt was unhappy with both wave function collapse and the Copenhagen Interpretation. He wrote that Everett's formalistic argument for pure wave mechanics was `"beautifully consistent''. But he could not accept the ontological ramifications of the theory because, `"I simply do not branch.'' This document is Everett's copy of the letter, as reproduced by Wheeler's secretary. It differs from Wheeler's own copy by several sentences at the bottom of page 4, cut off during the reproduction process. It is likely that Everett never saw these missing sentences.

•May 7, 1957•0 citations

H. J. Groenewold letter to John Wheeler, 11-April-1957

Hilbrand Johannes Groenewold

In mid-March, 1957, as Hugh Everett III was preparing to defend his thesis and graduate, John Wheeler asked him to send preprints of the short thesis and Wheeler's companion article to Bohr and other prominent physicists. In April, H. J. Groenewold of Natuurkundig Laboratorium der Rijks-Universiteit te Groningen, Germany wrote to Everett and Wheeler with his criticism of the revised dissertation. He had previously read the long dissertation sent to Copenhagen. He thought that the preprint was a "much improved" abstract of a (rewritten) longer thesis, although he confessed to not being able to follow many of the arguments. Everett furiously annotated his copy of Groenewold's letter, answering his criticisms point by point and concluding that Groenewold, too, had not thoroughly studied his work.

•May 19, 2011•0 citations
In 1967, Bryce DeWitt published a three part essay, called "Quantum Theory of Gravitation." He sent a preprint of the first part to Wheeler for his comments. This is DeWitt's reply to Wheeler's comments. It is notable because DeWitt mentions Everett, Bohr, Rosenfeld, and Wheeler's companion to Everett's paper.
As a close friend and collaborator of J.A. Wheeler's, Bryce S. DeWitt was one of the first people to see a draft of the short version of Hugh Everett's thesis (he did not read the longer version until much later, as is evidenced by some of the complaints in this letter). In May 1957, DeWitt wrote a long and thoughtful letter to Wheeler about how Everett's theory had conceptual parallels with Einstein's theory of general relativity. At the end of that month, Everett sent his reply. This document is a handwritten draft/outline of the letter that Everett ultimately sent.
As a close friend and collaborator of John Wheeler's, Bryce DeWitt was one of the first people to see a draft of the short version of Hugh Everett's thesis (he did not read the longer version until much later, as is evidenced by some of the complaints in this letter). In May 1957, DeWitt wrote a long and thoughtful letter to Wheeler about how Everett's theory had conceptual parallels with Einstein's theory of general relativity. Wheeler promptly forwarded a copy of the letter to Everett. DeWitt was unhappy with both wave function collapse and the Copenhagen Interpretation. He wrote that Everett's formalistic argument for pure wave mechanics was "beautifully consistent''. But he could not accept the ontological ramifications of the theory because, "I simply do not branch.'' This document is the original letter, as saved by Wheeler. It includes several sentences on the bottom of page 4 that were cut off when Wheeler's secretary reproduced the letter for Everett.
As a close friend and collaborator of Wheeler's, DeWitt was one of the first people to see a draft of the short version of Everett's thesis (he did not read the longer version until much later, as is evidenced by some of the complaints in this letter). In May 1957, DeWitt wrote a long and thoughtful letter to Wheeler about how Everett's theory had conceptual parallels with Einstein's theory of general relativity. At the end of that month, Everett sent his reply. This document is a copy of the letter that Everett sent. In response to DeWitt's insistence that he has direct introspective evidence that he does not split, Everett draws an analogy with anti-Copernicans, who argued that they had direct evidence that the world did not move. Based on much later remarks, it seems that DeWitt was convinced by Everett's rejoinder.
As a close friend and collaborator of John Wheeler's, Bryce S. DeWitt was one of the first people to see a draft of the short version of Hugh Everett's thesis (he did not read the longer version until much later, as is evidenced by some of the complaints in this letter). In May 1957, DeWitt wrote a long and thoughtful letter to Wheeler about how Everett's theory had conceptual parallels with Einstein's theory of general relativity. Wheeler promptly forwarded a copy of the letter to Everett. DeWitt was unhappy with both wave function collapse and the Copenhagen Interpretation. He wrote that Everett's formalistic argument for pure wave mechanics was `"beautifully consistent''. But he could not accept the ontological ramifications of the theory because, `"I simply do not branch.'' This document is Everett's copy of the letter, as reproduced by Wheeler's secretary. It differs from Wheeler's own copy by several sentences at the bottom of page 4, cut off during the reproduction process. It is likely that Everett never saw these missing sentences.
In mid-March, 1957, as Hugh Everett III was preparing to defend his thesis and graduate, John Wheeler asked him to send preprints of the short thesis and Wheeler's companion article to Bohr and other prominent physicists. In April, H. J. Groenewold of Natuurkundig Laboratorium der Rijks-Universiteit te Groningen, Germany wrote to Everett and Wheeler with his criticism of the revised dissertation. He had previously read the long dissertation sent to Copenhagen. He thought that the preprint was a "much improved" abstract of a (rewritten) longer thesis, although he confessed to not being able to follow many of the arguments. Everett furiously annotated his copy of Groenewold's letter, answering his criticisms point by point and concluding that Groenewold, too, had not thoroughly studied his work.