It's a long time since I played QG's, (nowadays I play 1 ... Nf6)
But the wisdom at that time ('70's) was that e4 is no good, because of the reply ... e5.
I can't remember much about it, but I think thee idea was that Black could now somehow hold on the gambit pawn? But there's probably new theory out there, and my memoriy's not what it used to be. So, maybe you should just ignore all this...
I don't know much about this line, so better not to open my mouth and remove all doubt etc but I've recently started learning to play the Queen's Gambit (having traded in the KIA) Have a look at this Chess Mentor lesson for another line (3. e3), occasionally useful for trapping the unwary patzer.
http://www.chess.com/chessmentor/view_lesson.html?id=33
It's a long time since I played QG's, (nowadays I play 1 ... Nf6)
But the wisdom at that time ('70's) was that e4 is no good, because of the reply ... e5.
I can't remember much about it, but I think thee idea was that Black could now somehow hold on the gambit pawn? But there's probably new theory out there, and my memory's not what it used to be. So, maybe you should just ignore all this...
I'll take your advice. Also, I don't like 1...Nf6! 
Correct. Historically, 3.e4 was considered a dubious move. It's considered a good move today.
Second, I have not seen a line in the Queen's Gambit where White can not regain the pawn, unless White is happy to do so, and thus make it a true gambit.
Chess authors will frequently say that the QG is not a true gambit, unlike the King's Gambit, which is a true gambit.
It's a long time since I played QG's, (nowadays I play 1 ... Nf6)
But the wisdom at that time ('70's) was that e4 is no good, because of the reply ... e5.
I can't remember much about it, but I think thee idea was that Black could now somehow hold on the gambit pawn? But there's probably new theory out there, and my memoriy's not what it used to be. So, maybe you should just ignore all this...
not sure about holding the pawn, but e5 does lead to the Q trade where black takes with the king and can't castle.
Two possible ways black can hold the pawn. I've provided just the starts of these lines. - Eric C
I did see that move in a database once, and then forgot about it. Clever stuff. Thank you. 
In lines with an early e3, white assumes that black will probably play ...c5/...cxd4 or ...e5/...exd4 at some point freeing white's queen bishop.
As you say, 3.e4 is certainly a viable try, and leads to more open positions.
Recent books on the QGA include Alexander Raetsky and Maxim Chetverik's Starting Out: Queen's Gambit Accepted (2006), James Rizzitano's How to beat 1.d4 (2005) and Konstantin Sakaev and Semko Semkov's The Queen's Gambit Accepted (2005).
@ Estragon - I never thought of playing the Queen's Gambit as a true gambit. Interesting.
To all, thanks for the ideas and book suggestions.
Why can't Black's bishop capture White's undefended pawn at b4, I thought to myself after looking at Eric C's post #6. Here's the answer. Enjoy.
Lol this is what I play in tournaments. Ive gotten so many positions that were completely winning as black by playing e5. The main theory is Nf3 here though many white players play d5 since it makes sense. After that blacks main idea is nf6 nxe4 and its actually hard to defend. If bg5 then bc4 attacks f4 again. then nc3 means b5 threatening b4 and winning the pawn. The only move to defend both f2 and e4 is qc2, but b5 a4 and c6. trading off the c6 pawn gives black too much activity, and leaving it there keeps b5 alive.if qc2 there are tactics that attack the queen, and Nc6 with nd4 ideas is a good move
Nf3 is by far the best move for white, and its really rare to face it(1 in 20 players at 1700) and since qga e5 is also very rare, until a player hits FM-IM level, most poeple dont kknow about it. I havent played it much, but the theory for white and black is just to play a normal, scotch like game, which also gets many players out of their theory, and its easier to deal with than QGD or slav when we just slowly get suffocated to death.
If you need help, please contact our Help and Support team.
The most popular reply in the Queen's Gambit Accepted after 1.d4 d5 2.c4 dxc4 is 3.Nf3, preventing Black from playing 3...e5, while doing other good things for White.
After 1.d4 d5 2.c4 dxc4 3.e4, White has two center pawns and open lines for both bishops. After the popular 1.d4 d5 2.c4 dxc4 3.Nf3, White's bishop at c1 will most likely be blocked by the pawn move, e2-e3. How does White best activate the c1 bishop?
Why the fuss over the QGA? I see 2...dxc4 more often than I see the Queen's Gambit Declined, which I almost never see in Blitz.
What do you see as the pros and cons of playing 3.e4? Who has written a good book on 3.e4, and the Queen's Gambit Accepted?
If you have read my other topic, "Romance?!", there's no Kindle version for the Queen's Gambit chess opening. There is a strange romance story titled the Queen's Gambit.
I do have a book by John Watson titled Mastering the Chess Openings, Volume 2, which covers many openings starting with 1.d4. Mr. Watson devotes only a few pages to the QGA, but devotes about 60 pages to the Queen's Gambit Declined.
Wiki has this to say about 3.e4
3. e4 is a newer line — actually a resurrected classical line — aggressively establishing a pawn center and making a bid for central control which Black will try to undermine. It is called the Central Variation by Rizzitano, who notes its increase in popularity and strategic and tactical complexity.[2] Raetsky and Chetverik consider the line straightforward and critical, and remark that anyone playing the Queen's Gambit Accepted with Black must be prepared to meet it.[1]
Trying to protect the pawn with the greedy 3...b5 is fairly risky and rarely seen.[1]The main reply against the Central Variation is opposing the pawn center with 3...e5, which is a highly theoretical system. Other replies aimed at challenging the center are 3...Nc6 with ideas akin to the Chigorin Defense, 3...Nf6, provoking 4.e5, and 3...c5 undermining the center at d4.
---
If Black plays 3...e5, White needs to know how to respond. It's sharp play.