In article ,
(Patrick Reany) wrote:
Some defamers of Einstein wrongfully charge him with being a nitwit
pretender who stole his work from others. Einstein's own generation of
physicists did not believe that. How is this contradiction to be
resolved? Simple. The defamers are liars.
snip

They're not liars; they merely wish to destroy productive
work. Einstein is chosen because everybody acknowledges
that he was smart, including those who wish to prove he
was not smart. This is the beautiful irony of their effort.

/BAH

Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.

Some defamers of Einstein wrongfully charge him with being a nitwit
pretender who stole his work from others. Einstein's own generation of
physicists did not believe that. How is this contradiction to be
resolved? Simple. The defamers are liars.

Below is a testimony from Louis de Broglie about Einstein's huge
contributions to physics in all the areas he made contributions, found
in

A GENERAL SURVEY OF THE SCIENTIFIC WORK OF ALBERT EINSTEIN, p109--127,
Albert Einstein, Philosopher-Scientist, Vol 1.

--- p.109 ---

For any educated man, whether or not a professional scientist, the
name of Albert Einstein calls to mind the intellectual effort and
GENIUS which overturned the most traditional notions of physics and
culminated in the establishment of the relativity of the notions of
space and time, the inertia of energy, and an interpretation of
gravitational forces which is in some sort purely geometrical. Therein
lies a magnificent achievement comparable to the greatest that may be
found in the history of the sciences; comparable, for example, to the
achievements of Newton. This alone would have sufficed to assure its
author imperishable fame. But, great as it was, this achievement must
not cause us to forget that Albert Einstein also rendered decisive
contributions to other important advances in contemporary physics.
Even if we were to overlook his no less remarkable work on the
Brownian movement, statistical thermodynamics, and equilibrium
fluctuations, we could not fail to take note of the tremendous import
of his research upon a developing quantum theory and, in particular,
his conception of "light quanta" which, reintroducing the corpuscular
notion into optics, was to send physicists in search of some kind of
synthesis of Fresnel's wave theory of light and the old corpuscular
theory. The latter, after having been held by such men as Newton, was,
as we know, destined for oblivion. Thus, Einstein became the source of
an entire movement of ideas which, as wave mechanics and quantum
mechanics, was to cast so disturbing a light upon atomic phenomena
twenty years later.

[emphasis mine]

Patrick

"greywolf42" wrote in message ...

Patrick Reany wrote in message
om...
Some defamers of Einstein wrongfully charge him with being a nitwit
pretender who stole his work from others. Einstein's own generation of
physicists did not believe that. How is this contradiction to be
resolved? Simple. The defamers are liars.

Below is a testimony from Louis de Broglie about Einstein's huge
contributions to physics in all the areas he made contributions, found
in

A GENERAL SURVEY OF THE SCIENTIFIC WORK OF ALBERT EINSTEIN, p109--127,
Albert Einstein, Philosopher-Scientist, Vol 1.

--- p.109 ---

For any educated man, whether or not a professional scientist, the
name of Albert Einstein calls to mind the intellectual effort and
GENIUS which overturned the most traditional notions of physics and
culminated in the establishment of the relativity of the notions of
space and time, the inertia of energy, and an interpretation of
gravitational forces which is in some sort purely geometrical. Therein
lies a magnificent achievement comparable to the greatest that may be
found in the history of the sciences; comparable, for example, to the
achievements of Newton. This alone would have sufficed to assure its
author imperishable fame. But, great as it was, this achievement must
not cause us to forget that Albert Einstein also rendered decisive
contributions to other important advances in contemporary physics.
Even if we were to overlook his no less remarkable work on the
Brownian movement, statistical thermodynamics, and equilibrium
fluctuations, we could not fail to take note of the tremendous import
of his research upon a developing quantum theory and, in particular,
his conception of "light quanta" which, reintroducing the corpuscular
notion into optics, was to send physicists in search of some kind of
synthesis of Fresnel's wave theory of light and the old corpuscular
theory. The latter, after having been held by such men as Newton, was,
as we know, destined for oblivion. Thus, Einstein became the source of
an entire movement of ideas which, as wave mechanics and quantum
mechanics, was to cast so disturbing a light upon atomic phenomena
twenty years later.

[emphasis mine]


Patrick. Please don't waste everyone's time with appeals to authority.

No, you better waste everyone's time with appeal to Petr Beckman's
pathetic inferiority:


1 greywolf42 14 jun 2003
2 Ed Stamm 14 jun 2003
3 greywolf42 14 jun 2003
4 Ed Stamm 14 jun 2003
5 greywolf42 15 jun 2003
6 Ed Stamm 15 jun 2003 [no reply from Mingst]
7 15 jun 2003
8 Ed Stamm 15 jun 2003 [no reply from Stowe or Mingst]
9 15 jun 2003 [reply to message 2]

Dirk Vdm

Dirk Van de moortel wrote in
message ...

"greywolf42" wrote in message
...

Patrick Reany wrote in message
om...

{snip}



Patrick. Please don't waste everyone's time with appeals to authority.

No, you better waste everyone's time with appeal to Petr Beckman's
pathetic inferiority:


1 greywolf42 14 jun 2003
2 Ed Stamm 14 jun 2003
3 greywolf42 14 jun 2003
4 Ed Stamm 14 jun 2003
5 greywolf42 15 jun 2003
6 Ed Stamm 15 jun 2003 [no reply from Mingst]
7 15 jun 2003
8 Ed Stamm 15 jun 2003 [no reply from Stowe or Mingst]
9 15 jun 2003 [reply to message 2]


And we see Dinky van der Tremble's name where on this list?

And Dinky doesn't lists the ongoing post following up this thread. Nor does
he admit to my four separate requests from him to provide anything that he
thought wasn't answered.

So, Dinky, still not willing to post any physics? Still not willing to bet
on any of those numerous cheapshots? Still can't post anything relevant to
the subject at hand?

I thought not. Bye.

greywolf42
ubi dubium ibi libertas

Shaun Webb wrote in message
news
On Sat, 26 Jul 2003 13:58:53 -0700, greywolf42 wrote:


Patrick Reany wrote in message
om...
Some defamers of Einstein wrongfully charge him with being a nitwit
pretender who stole his work from others. Einstein's own generation of
physicists did not believe that. How is this contradiction to be
resolved? Simple. The defamers are liars.

Below is a testimony from Louis de Broglie about Einstein's huge
contributions to physics in all the areas he made contributions, found
in

A GENERAL SURVEY OF THE SCIENTIFIC WORK OF ALBERT EINSTEIN, p109--127,
Albert Einstein, Philosopher-Scientist, Vol 1.

--- p.109 ---

For any educated man, whether or not a professional scientist, the name
of Albert Einstein calls to mind the intellectual effort and GENIUS
which overturned the most traditional notions of physics and culminated
in the establishment of the relativity of the notions of space and
time, the inertia of energy, and an interpretation of gravitational
forces which is in some sort purely geometrical. Therein lies a
magnificent achievement comparable to the greatest that may be found in
the history of the sciences; comparable, for example, to the
achievements of Newton. This alone would have sufficed to assure its
author imperishable fame. But, great as it was, this achievement must
not cause us to forget that Albert Einstein also rendered decisive
contributions to other important advances in contemporary physics. Even
if we were to overlook his no less remarkable work on the Brownian
movement, statistical thermodynamics, and equilibrium fluctuations, we
could not fail to take note of the tremendous import of his research
upon a developing quantum theory and, in particular, his conception of
"light quanta" which, reintroducing the corpuscular notion into optics,
was to send physicists in search of some kind of synthesis of Fresnel's
wave theory of light and the old corpuscular theory. The latter, after
having been held by such men as Newton, was, as we know, destined for
oblivion. Thus, Einstein became the source of an entire movement of
ideas which, as wave mechanics and quantum mechanics, was to cast so
disturbing a light upon atomic phenomena twenty years later.

[emphasis mine]


Patrick. Please don't waste everyone's time with appeals to authority.

Another classic relativist "invisible snipper."

My word, you really are that stupid?

The classic relativist ad hominem insult.

He's not appealing to authority to demonstrate the truth of the claim
"Einstein is a genius", or "Everything Einstein says is right."

But that is the essence of the quote, above. "Einstein is a genius"
(magnificent, greatest, imperishable fame, great, remarkable, tremendous).
A brief mention of Newton for the original corpuscular light theory. No
mention of all the others that preceded Einstein in the fields mentioned.

He is pointing to primary irrefutable documents to demonstrate the truth
of the claim "Einstein's contempories acknowledged that his work was
original."

There is no mention in the above quote about Einstein's "originality" -- or
rather any evidence against the "charge" of Einstein plagiarizing other's
work.

And the quote contains no data whatsoever. It is pure proof-by-assertion.
And Patrick's use of same is pure appeal-to-authority. Also non-sequiteur,
because it doesn't address his point.

Don't get me wrong, I think Einstein was a smart guy. But the fawning
worship of you and Patrick's kind make my gorge buoyant.

greywolf42
ubi dubium ibi libertas

In article , wrote:
In article ,
(Patrick Reany) wrote:
Some defamers of Einstein wrongfully charge him with being a nitwit
pretender who stole his work from others. Einstein's own generation of
physicists did not believe that. How is this contradiction to be
resolved? Simple. The defamers are liars.
snip

They're not liars; they merely wish to destroy productive
work. Einstein is chosen because everybody acknowledges
that he was smart, including those who wish to prove he
was not smart. This is the beautiful irony of their effort.

Also because he was a single recognizable personality that brought
relativity to the world, a theory that can be worked with using high
school algebra. That can't be said for quantum mechanics, which has a
multitude of personalities associated with its evolution, and there's
really nothing you can do with it without somewhat advanced math.

--
"A good plan executed right now is far better than a perfect plan
executed next week."
-Gen. George S. Patton

"greywolf42" wrote in message ...
Patrick. Please don't waste everyone's time with appeals to authority.

No, no, this is an appeal to aristocracy.

Jan Bielawski

In article ,
(Gregory L. Hansen) wrote:
In article , wrote:
In article ,
(Patrick Reany) wrote:
Some defamers of Einstein wrongfully charge him with being a nitwit
pretender who stole his work from others. Einstein's own generation of
physicists did not believe that. How is this contradiction to be
resolved? Simple. The defamers are liars.
snip

They're not liars; they merely wish to destroy productive
work. Einstein is chosen because everybody acknowledges
that he was smart, including those who wish to prove he
was not smart. This is the beautiful irony of their effort.

Also because he was a single recognizable personality that brought
relativity to the world, a theory that can be worked with using high
school algebra. That can't be said for quantum mechanics, which has a
multitude of personalities associated with its evolution, and there's
really nothing you can do with it without somewhat advanced math.

We had a project prevention person. His trick was to ensure
that the guys would spend their time on proving that his tests
didn't work. Finally, TW told him that nothing was ever going
to be done so that those tests would run without error. It
didn't stop him from using the error reports of the runs to
hold up ships. And he did this same set of tests, night after
night (using scarce stand alone time), project after project
after project. He refused to write tests to test the new stuff
(which was his job). Before you ask the obvious, the answer is
office politics.

Just to make it clear to the logic-challenged: these tests would
report an error if certain pieces of functionality worked.

/BAH




Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.

Patrick Reany wrote:
Some defamers of Einstein wrongfully charge him with being a nitwit
pretender who stole his work from others. Einstein's own generation of
physicists did not believe that. How is this contradiction to be
resolved? Simple. The defamers are liars.

Dear Patrick,
your efforts to defend Einstein against defamers are honourable.
But that may have been a problem during the Nazi time, i.e. 70 to 60
years ago. Nowadays, no serious human, neither in Germany nor
elsewhere, will doubt in Einstein as the essential originator
of SR/GR, and contributor of parts of QM.
Nevertheless, nearly all people misjudge and underestimate Einstein
in an important point: the context of the continuum (represented
by SR/GR with Maxwell's equations) with the quanta ! They all
believe up to now that Einstein's great prediction (particles
emerge from the continuum) be wrong. Are you all still not aware
of the *fact* that the _results_ of my numerical simulations agree
with Einstein in this very important point ???

Ulrich Bruchholz
http://home.t-online.de/home/Ulrich.Bruchholz/

ueb wrote in message ...
Patrick Reany wrote:
Some defamers of Einstein wrongfully charge him with being a nitwit
pretender who stole his work from others. Einstein's own generation of
physicists did not believe that. How is this contradiction to be
resolved? Simple. The defamers are liars.

Dear Patrick,
your efforts to defend Einstein against defamers are honourable.
But that may have been a problem during the Nazi time, i.e. 70 to 60
years ago. Nowadays, no serious human, neither in Germany nor
elsewhere, will doubt in Einstein as the essential originator
of SR/GR, and contributor of parts of QM.

You should be more observant about the Einstein defaming that DOES go
on periodically on the sci newsgroups. It's real, and it's real sick.

I'll never understand Einstein hatred. Is it race hatred? Is it
jealousy? Is it a combination of things? Of course, the Einstein
haters will just turn around and scoff at the "Einstein lovers." This
is a typical counterclaim and a red herring for sure. After all,
Einstein is a bona fide genius in physics. I admire him, but I admire
Maxwell, Planck, Lorentz, Heisenberg, Newton, Schrodinger, Bohr, Born,
and Feynman too. I don't "love" any of these physicists, but I do
admire them and appreciate the contributions they made to physics.
(BTW, I rank Heisenberg as second to Einstein's genius in physics in
the 20th century.)

Why is Einstein singled out for such irrational hatred and obvious
defamation? Why not Feynman or Heisenberg of Bohr? I would defend
these physicists as well from obvious defamation were it necessary to
do so. Feynman's QED theory is much more "non-classical" than anything
Einstein ever proposed!

The Einstein defamers treat Einstein a 100 times more special than I
ever treated him! After all, they claim that he was a dolt thief that
stole everything of importance he ever did in physics. That's
ludicrous at face value, because it also completely impugns his
generation of top physicists as well, for it would be impossible for
this charge against Einstein to be true while maintaining that
Einstein's generation of physicists was NOT in a conspiracy to cover
up Einstein's peer theft from the world. To any reasonable person, it
should be ludicrous to imagine such a cover up to even work. Why would
this highly diverse group of top physicists --- as judged by their
religions, races, philosophies, and nationalities --- even want to do
this? How could they hope to even succeed? And where are the cries of
theft from the presumably large number of physicists that Einstein
"stole" his published papers from?

If it's true that Einstein, the "dolt," was able to pull off this
virtually impossible con game on the world, then not only was he a
genius, he was the greatest genius of the 20th century, far surpassing
any mere physics genius of the 20th century.

I say that it would take a great physicist just to find a way to redo
Lorentz's theory so that a preferred rest space (for assigning
absolute velocities), as embodied in the luminiferous ether, could be
dispensed with, but Einstein showed his genius also by explaining
precisely *why* he was not happy with Lorentz's ether theory:

Einstein wrote:

H. A. Lorentz even discovered the "Lorentz transformation,"
later called after him, though without recognizing its
group character. To him Maxwell's equations in empty space
held only for a particular coordinate system distinguished
from all other coordinate systems by its state of rest.
This was a truly paradoxical situation because the theory
seemed to restrict the inertial system more strongly than
did classical mechanics. This circumstance, which from the
empirical point of view appeared completely unmotivated,
was bounded to lead to the theory of special relativity.
---- H. A. Lorentz, Creator and Personality, Ideas
and Opinions, p. 75.

No dolt wrote these inspired words. Not even Poincare was thinking
along these lines, even though he was willing to concede that the
ether might not be detectable. Therefore Einstein seemed to have been
motivated to remove the crutch of the absolute rest space of the ether
because Nature itself did not seem to motivate its inclusion into the
foundations of physics!

Einstein's genius, then, was to defend what I call the "pure principle
of relativity," which is that a physicist is not to introduce a
preferred inertial frame into the foundation of physics -- even as a
model of an undetectable inertial frame (this is a modeling constraint
and NOT about Truth, but about a formal point of view). This goes way
beyond Lorentz covariance, which only looks at covariance of
equations. It is ironic to Einstein that Newton's mechanics of the
chargeless mass particle did not require the assigning of absolute
velocities, but just add a charge to the particle, and suddenly such a
preferred frame is needed for the "description" of motions of these
particles. ("I *don't* think so!" I suppose Einstein said to himself.)

Thus, Einstein's genius led us back to Newton's relativity in the
"pure" form of it, while allowing for its extension to include optics
and electrodynamics (1905 form). I repeat: the "pure" (or strong) form
of the PoR is about deep theoretical modeling, not about covariance
per se, which is what the weak form is about. The pure form already
includes mere covariance.

The obeisance to the mechanical ether was holding physics back, and
Einstein's genius showed how to make an end run around it to make a
real touchdown for modern physics! Although I'm sure that Einstein
would have characterized his own accomplishment here as him having
merely followed his instincts that physics should pursue a foundation
that assumes harmony, and one cornerstone of that harmony is the pure
PoR.

Patrick