Einstein

[winoman]

OK my view

I have heard before that others had come up with portions of (or more) of the Theory of Relativity prior to Einstein (don't know if it was general - special or both) - OK - so - I'm not the expert - it really doesn't directly concern me. But Ok - was Einstein a plagurist? I don't know - but just because you paste the image of a book that claims so does not make it to be so. I don't care enough to read the book really - but OK a bit curious - thought I would read some comments - and well - seems that this book - while it may have its points - certainly cannot be said to prove anything - so it seems. And this aurthor seems to have an axe to grind - and I find it interesting that many of those who seem so adamant that Einstein was a fraud just happen to be our usual suspect (when it comes to racism concerning members of a specific ethnic group). So anyway - I'm still unconvinced. And - as Einsteion achievemnts spanned a number of different fields with physics (quantum and otherwise) and mathmatics - and it seems as though he was and is accepted within these communities as an honorable and special person - I see no reason to doubt him per se. And as I indicated before - I would be suprised if he was entirely ortiginal - after all who is - particularly in Science where "discoveries" are often incremental or if sudden leaps - still based upon previous work - did he perhaps hog the limelight and diss some people - seems like that is entirely possible - again - he isn;t unuiqie in this - I see such behavior all the time (and you will too in the professional world - if you haven't already seen it a great deal in academia) - so basically - yawn

[Lamb Boy]

I would be suprised if he was entirely ortiginal - after all who is - particularly in Science where "discoveries" are often incremental or if sudden leaps - still based upon previous work - did he perhaps hog the limelight and diss some people - seems like that is entirely possible - again - he isn;t unuiqie in this - I see such behavior all the time (and you will too in the professional world - if you haven't already seen it a great deal in academia) - so basically - yawn

You're absolutely right Wino in respect to scientist coming to similar theories at the same time. Not to go off on a tangent but Darwin is a REALLY good example as illustrated in these articles...

Independent birth of the same theory

Darwin's Precursors and Influences

As far as Einstein goes here are some interesting articles as well...

Was Einstein a plagiarist?

The culture of Einstein

Stark ... only idiots are incapable of answering questions. I have posed two questions to you and you haven't answered either. The second question I really thought you'd be able to answer but now I suppose you either can't or won't. It seems you live up to your name that's for sure.

Stark = Instant expert ... add water.

[bell-the-cat]

I responded by essentially claiming that he is not much more than a household name as you said.

Exactly, Einstein was more of an expert in (self) marketing than science.

[Siamanto]

Stark ... only idiots are incapable of answering questions. I have posed two questions to you and you haven't answered either.

LOL Ironically, I also asked you - among others - two questions and still no answer! Shall I perceive the lack of reply as you did?

[Lamb Boy]

LOL Ironically, I also asked you - among others - two questions and still no answer! Shall I perceive the lack of reply as you did?

Did you direct your question specifically to me as I did Stark?

That's what I thought ... you guys really like to hold each others hand through this board that's for sure.

To answer your question ... I'm a MENSA fan boy

Seriously I imagine unless you throw in the cliche IQ test what determines a genius is pretty subjective. I mean savants are considered genii but I wonder how well they would fare on an IQ test, ya know?

I thinks it's a subjective judgement ...

[Siamanto]

Seriously I imagine unless you throw in the cliche IQ test what determines a genius is pretty subjective. I mean savants are considered genii but I wonder how well they would fare on an IQ test, ya know?

I thinks it's a subjective judgement ...

Are you suggesting that all the "certainty" that you have so passionately and with all confidence expressed can only be of subjective nature?

I have a definition of "genius" that would classify Einstein as a minor intelligence - even if everything that is attributed to him is a fact .
Examples of "real" geniuses are Thales, Galois and Godel - to limit myself to the History of Mathematics.

PS. IQ tests are for "average" - with no negative connotations - individuals.

[Lamb Boy]

PS. IQ tests are for "average" - with no negative connotations - individuals.

Ok apparently you are not familiar with tongue 'n cheek humor ... I was making fun IQ tests, duh.

We're not debating what a genius is or what fabric they're made up of only you're doing that. We WERE talking about Einstein being a plagiarist and taking credit for other ppls work. Get a clue Siamanto or quit trying to change the subject.

If I call Einstein a genius then I subjectively arrived at that conclusion. I still feel that way making your last post/point completely moot.

[Armenian]

You should seriously be banned for your RACISTS rhetoric.

I said he stole scientific concepts from his German wife and because of that I am a racist??? You need to get your kosher head examined, goatboy.

[Siamanto]

Ok apparently you are not familiar with tongue 'n cheek humor ... I was making fun IQ tests, duh.

Just curious, what made you think that I did not get your message and how my comment suggested that I did get it i.e. your message? Most of all, how my comment is in disagreement with yours?
With all due respect, you're a bit paranoid or...

We're not debating what a genius is or what fabric they're made up of only you're doing that. We WERE talking about Einstein being a plagiarist and taking credit for other ppls work. Get a clue Siamanto or quit trying to change the subject.

LOL Aren't you the one who used the word "genius" first? You're a bit funny!

To Mr. Hilarious Stark Evade AND Anon I have one question to pose to the both of you. While you guys like to defame a genius like Albert Einstein....

Later, it has been used by Anonymouse, in the post preceding the one where I first asked for a definition.

If I call Einstein a genius then I subjectively arrived at that conclusion.

It was hard to see it with such clarity in the overconfidence of your, quite disdainous, statements. Was it a lack of Intellectual Integrity?

I still feel that way making your last post/point completely moot.

LOL Of course it does!
Back to your overconfident self?


PS. Good Night!

[loseyourname]

There is a pretty good discussion of this topic here. The concensus seems to be that Poincare came up with a lot of the math on which SR was later based, and of course, Hilbert developed the GR field equations at the same time Einstein did. There is no doubt that he stood on the shoulders of giants and it really helped him, but his forte was never math. His forte was seeing the implications of the math in a way that the other men did not. He was able to synthesize the various equations developed over the years into a coherent conceptual framework on which all macroscopic modern physics is now based. Whatever you want to call him, this was no small accomplishment.