I have done a terrible thing, I have postulated a particle that cannot be detected.

The layman always means, when he says "reality" that he is speaking of something self-evidently known; whereas to me it seems the most important and exceedingly difficult task of our time is to work on the construction of a new idea of reality.

I confess, that very different from you, I do find sometimes scientific inspiration in mysticism ... but this is counterbalanced by an immediate sense for mathematics.

The fact that the author thinks slowly is not serious, but the fact that he publishes faster than he thinks is inexcusable.

How can one avoid despondency if one thinks of the anomalous Zeeman effect?

For quite a while I have set for myself the rule if a theoretician says 'universal' it just means pure nonsense.

You know, what Einstein has just said isn't so stupid.