"Greatest Mining Pioneer of Australia of all Times"
wrote in message
oups.com...

E = mc² stolen from Henri Poincaré

I disagree regarding Poincaré. Have you actually *read* what Poincaré wrote?
I haven't and thus I don't make such accusations. I also don't make those
accusations because the history of mass is well known nad therefore nobody
is confused about it nor has anyone not be given the credit that they
deserve. I have been fortunate enough to have remained friends with my
physics professors who have guided to me appropriate resources over the
years. Especially with regards to Max Jammer's books on mass. It was in
Jammer's books that was one of the sources from which I learned about
Poincaré. Other sources include the American Journal of Physics, and perhaps
EM texts that I've read over the last 20 years.

Have you ever read the article "Did Einstein really discover "E = mc^2"?, by
W.L Fadner, Am. J. Phys., 56(2), February 1988? The abstract is online at
http://www.geocities.com/physics_wor...8_abstract.htm
and reads
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In 1952, Herbert Ives claimed that Einstein's first development of E = mc^2
was circular, and that he had not been the first to develop that equation.
That allegation has been repeated in several more recent works. Earlier,
Planck asserted that one of the postulates that Einstein had used in that
development was not exact. Those claims and subsequent papers concerning
them are examined herein. The surprisingly long history history of the
mass-energy relation is summarized. In the context of this topic, it is
argued that circularity is seldom a legitimate critique of scientific
proposals. A simple refutation of Planck's claim is also included.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The first in the list the author gives regarding the history of the
mass-energy relation is J.J. Thompson in 1885. It was not of the form E =
mc^2 but it related the increased inertia dm on a charged conducter in
motion. The next was by Oliver Heaviside in 1889 which gave another value
for dm. In 1900 Poincaré showed that electromagnetic energy has momentum. He
showed, according to Fadner, that this momentum ncan be represented by a
"fictitious fluid" with mass density rho = J/c^2 where J is the energy
density. At this point Poincaré had never assigned an energy to mass. He
assigned a mass to energy! The concept of mass in relativity wasn incomplete
until 1914. If you'd like I can e-mail this article to you. In the
"Conclusions" section the authhor writes "Therefore, it is reasonable to
associate the equation E = mc^2 with Einstein as its chief developer, as
long as we realize that many others were involved in that development.

Since you seem to "know" otherwise then I'd like to see your research. How
did you come to your conclusion?

Curved space stolen from Riemann

I disagree. The intrinsic curvature of mathematical spaces is to be
attributed to Riemann. However it was a few others who applied this
mathematics to spacetime. Nobody ever took anything away from Riemann.

Space-time concept stolen from Minkowski, his math professor and from
same he stole as well the Tensor Calculus

I disagree. The concept of spacetime has been and always will be attributed
to Minkowski. And it wasn't Minkowski who invented tensors. A reliable
source (a math professor aquantaince of mine) agrees with me when I tell you
that it was Riemann who invented tensors.

Contraction of objects due to speed stolen from Fitzgerald

And that is why its called the "Lorentz-Fitzgerald Contraction."

Constant of the speed of light stolen from Lorentz

Do you mean that value of the speed of light or the invariance of the speed
of light. In either case please provide proof or a reference to material
which proves this.

This is Poincaré who wrote in 1904 that absolute movement is not
detectable.

So? Einstein said that the laws of physics are the same in all inertial
frames. This was postulated before Eistein but Einstein really took it and
went off and explained the implications of it. Hence it has Einstein's name
attached to it. The principle of relativity is sure not knew. Even Newton
knew of this theory but only with respect to the equations of mechanics.

This is Poincaré too who created the concept of relativity in 1904
then ( following that E = mc² discovery )
That story further of the clocks lagging in time is stolen from
Larmor

I recommend you get an historical text such as that by Jammer before you
continue with these accusations.

[snip related stuff]

Pete

On Sep 26, 7:08 pm, "Pmb" wrote:
"Greatest Mining Pioneer of Australia of all wrote in message

oups.com...

E = mc² stolen from Henri Poincaré

I disagree regarding Poincaré. Have you actually *read* what Poincaré wrote?
I haven't and thus I don't make such accusations. I also don't make those
accusations because the history of mass is well known nad therefore nobody
is confused about it nor has anyone not be given the credit that they
deserve. I have been fortunate enough to have remained friends with my
physics professors who have guided to me appropriate resources over the
years. Especially with regards to Max Jammer's books on mass. It was in
Jammer's books that was one of the sources from which I learned about
Poincaré. Other sources include the American Journal of Physics, and perhaps
EM texts that I've read over the last 20 years.

Have you ever read the article "Did Einstein really discover "E = mc^2"?, by
W.L Fadner, Am. J. Phys., 56(2), February 1988? The abstract is online athttp://www.geocities.com/physics_world/abstracts/Fadner_1988_abstract...
and reads
---------------------------------------------------------------------------*-----------
In 1952, Herbert Ives claimed that Einstein's first development of E = mc^2
was circular, and that he had not been the first to develop that equation.
That allegation has been repeated in several more recent works. Earlier,
Planck asserted that one of the postulates that Einstein had used in that
development was not exact. Those claims and subsequent papers concerning
them are examined herein. The surprisingly long history history of the
mass-energy relation is summarized. In the context of this topic, it is
argued that circularity is seldom a legitimate critique of scientific
proposals. A simple refutation of Planck's claim is also included.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------*-----------
The first in the list the author gives regarding the history of the
mass-energy relation is J.J. Thompson in 1885. It was not of the form E =
mc^2 but it related the increased inertia dm on a charged conducter in
motion. The next was by Oliver Heaviside in 1889 which gave another value
for dm. In 1900 Poincaré showed that electromagnetic energy has momentum. He
showed, according to Fadner, that this momentum ncan be represented by a
"fictitious fluid" with mass density rho = J/c^2 where J is the energy
density. At this point Poincaré had never assigned an energy to mass. He
assigned a mass to energy! The concept of mass in relativity wasn incomplete
until 1914. If you'd like I can e-mail this article to you. In the
"Conclusions" section the authhor writes "Therefore, it is reasonable to
associate the equation E = mc^2 with Einstein as its chief developer, as
long as we realize that many others were involved in that development.

Since you seem to "know" otherwise then I'd like to see your research. How
did you come to your conclusion?

Curved space stolen from Riemann

I disagree. The intrinsic curvature of mathematical spaces is to be
attributed to Riemann. However it was a few others who applied this
mathematics to spacetime. Nobody ever took anything away from Riemann.

Space-time concept stolen from Minkowski, his math professor and from
same he stole as well the Tensor Calculus

I disagree. The concept of spacetime has been and always will be attributed
to Minkowski. And it wasn't Minkowski who invented tensors. A reliable
source (a math professor aquantaince of mine) agrees with me when I tell you
that it was Riemann who invented tensors.

Contraction of objects due to speed stolen from Fitzgerald

And that is why its called the "Lorentz-Fitzgerald Contraction."

Constant of the speed of light stolen from Lorentz

Do you mean that value of the speed of light or the invariance of the speed
of light. In either case please provide proof or a reference to material
which proves this.

This is Poincaré who wrote in 1904 that absolute movement is not
detectable.

So? Einstein said that the laws of physics are the same in all inertial
frames. This was postulated before Eistein but Einstein really took it and
went off and explained the implications of it. Hence it has Einstein's name
attached to it. The principle of relativity is sure not knew. Even Newton
knew of this theory but only with respect to the equations of mechanics.

This is Poincaré too who created the concept of relativity in 1904
then ( following that E = mc² discovery )
That story further of the clocks lagging in time is stolen from
Larmor

I recommend you get an historical text such as that by Jammer before you
continue with these accusations.

[snip related stuff]

Pete

xxein: I recommend you that both put all these little tidbits of info
into a comprehensive form and make a physics out of the mush.

wrote in message
oups.com...
On Sep 26, 7:08 pm, "Pmb" wrote:
"Greatest Mining Pioneer of Australia of all
wrote in message

oups.com...

E = mc² stolen from Henri Poincaré

I disagree regarding Poincaré. Have you actually *read* what Poincaré
wrote?
I haven't and thus I don't make such accusations. I also don't make those
accusations because the history of mass is well known nad therefore nobody
is confused about it nor has anyone not be given the credit that they
deserve. I have been fortunate enough to have remained friends with my
physics professors who have guided to me appropriate resources over the
years. Especially with regards to Max Jammer's books on mass. It was in
Jammer's books that was one of the sources from which I learned about
Poincaré. Other sources include the American Journal of Physics, and
perhaps
EM texts that I've read over the last 20 years.

Have you ever read the article "Did Einstein really discover "E = mc^2"?,
by
W.L Fadner, Am. J. Phys., 56(2), February 1988? The abstract is online
athttp://www.geocities.com/physics_world/abstracts/Fadner_1988_abstract...
and reads
---------------------------------------------------------------------------*-----------
In 1952, Herbert Ives claimed that Einstein's first development of E =
mc^2
was circular, and that he had not been the first to develop that equation.
That allegation has been repeated in several more recent works. Earlier,
Planck asserted that one of the postulates that Einstein had used in that
development was not exact. Those claims and subsequent papers concerning
them are examined herein. The surprisingly long history history of the
mass-energy relation is summarized. In the context of this topic, it is
argued that circularity is seldom a legitimate critique of scientific
proposals. A simple refutation of Planck's claim is also included.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------*-----------
The first in the list the author gives regarding the history of the
mass-energy relation is J.J. Thompson in 1885. It was not of the form E =
mc^2 but it related the increased inertia dm on a charged conducter in
motion. The next was by Oliver Heaviside in 1889 which gave another value
for dm. In 1900 Poincaré showed that electromagnetic energy has momentum.
He
showed, according to Fadner, that this momentum ncan be represented by a
"fictitious fluid" with mass density rho = J/c^2 where J is the energy
density. At this point Poincaré had never assigned an energy to mass. He
assigned a mass to energy! The concept of mass in relativity wasn
incomplete
until 1914. If you'd like I can e-mail this article to you. In the
"Conclusions" section the authhor writes "Therefore, it is reasonable to
associate the equation E = mc^2 with Einstein as its chief developer, as
long as we realize that many others were involved in that development.

Since you seem to "know" otherwise then I'd like to see your research. How
did you come to your conclusion?

Curved space stolen from Riemann

I disagree. The intrinsic curvature of mathematical spaces is to be
attributed to Riemann. However it was a few others who applied this
mathematics to spacetime. Nobody ever took anything away from Riemann.

Space-time concept stolen from Minkowski, his math professor and from
same he stole as well the Tensor Calculus

I disagree. The concept of spacetime has been and always will be
attributed
to Minkowski. And it wasn't Minkowski who invented tensors. A reliable
source (a math professor aquantaince of mine) agrees with me when I tell
you
that it was Riemann who invented tensors.

Contraction of objects due to speed stolen from Fitzgerald

And that is why its called the "Lorentz-Fitzgerald Contraction."

Constant of the speed of light stolen from Lorentz

Do you mean that value of the speed of light or the invariance of the
speed
of light. In either case please provide proof or a reference to material
which proves this.

This is Poincaré who wrote in 1904 that absolute movement is not
detectable.

So? Einstein said that the laws of physics are the same in all inertial
frames. This was postulated before Eistein but Einstein really took it and
went off and explained the implications of it. Hence it has Einstein's
name
attached to it. The principle of relativity is sure not knew. Even Newton
knew of this theory but only with respect to the equations of mechanics.

This is Poincaré too who created the concept of relativity in 1904
then ( following that E = mc² discovery )
That story further of the clocks lagging in time is stolen from
Larmor

I recommend you get an historical text such as that by Jammer before you
continue with these accusations.

[snip related stuff]

Pete

xxein: I recommend you that both put all these little tidbits of info
into a comprehensive form and make a physics out of the mush.

And I recommend that anyone who wishes to understand this subject matter
read the artilce "Did Einstein really discover "E = mc^2"?, by W.L Fadner,
Am. J. Phys., 56(2), February 1988?

Pete

"Pmb" wrote in message
. ..

"Greatest Mining Pioneer of Australia of all Times"
wrote in message
oups.com...

E = mc² stolen from Henri Poincaré

I disagree regarding Poincaré. Have you actually *read* what Poincaré
wrote? I haven't and thus I don't make such accusations.

I did. How can you disagree about something that you didn't read?! Apart of
the different forms of the equation, the above claim is exaggerated as
Poincare held back from drawing the conclusion from that relationship that
Einstein drew from it. The reference you cited (Fadner) is quite correct
IMHO.

[....]

Constant of the speed of light stolen from Lorentz

Do you mean that value of the speed of light or the invariance of the
speed of light. In either case please provide proof or a reference to
material which proves this.

Einstein simply omitted all references. "Stolen" is a great exaggeration -
otherwise Lorentz would hardly have become befriended with him. :-)

This is Poincaré who wrote in 1904 that absolute movement is not
detectable.

So? Einstein said that the laws of physics are the same in all inertial
frames.

Actually, it was Poincare who stressed that; Lorentz and Einstein followed
up on his call. However, they first looked at the laws of mechanics and
electrodynamics.

[...]

That story further of the clocks lagging in time is stolen from Larmor

Out of context, and greatly exaggerated.

I recommend you get an historical text such as that by Jammer before you
continue with these accusations.

Such texts are useful as they point to the original papers. Reading the
original papers is really necessary to verify the accusations and claims
that are made about them.

Harald

"harry" wrote in message
...

"Pmb" wrote in message
. ..

"Greatest Mining Pioneer of Australia of all Times"
wrote in message
oups.com...

E = mc² stolen from Henri Poincaré

I disagree regarding Poincaré. Have you actually *read* what Poincaré
wrote? I haven't and thus I don't make such accusations.

I did. How can you disagree about something that you didn't read?!

That was explained in my last e-mail. I researched his work, remember?

Pete

"harry" wrote in message
...

"Pmb" wrote in message
. ..

"Greatest Mining Pioneer of Australia of all Times"
wrote in message
oups.com...

E = mc² stolen from Henri Poincaré

I disagree regarding Poincaré. Have you actually *read* what Poincaré
wrote? I haven't and thus I don't make such accusations.

I did. How can you disagree about something that you didn't read?! Apart
of the different forms of the equation, the above claim is exaggerated as
Poincare held back from drawing the conclusion from that relationship that
Einstein drew from it. The reference you cited (Fadner) is quite correct
IMHO.

[....]

Constant of the speed of light stolen from Lorentz

Do you mean that value of the speed of light or the invariance of the
speed of light. In either case please provide proof or a reference to
material which proves this.

Einstein simply omitted all references. "Stolen" is a great exaggeration -
otherwise Lorentz would hardly have become befriended with him. :-)

This is Poincaré who wrote in 1904 that absolute movement is not
detectable.

So? Einstein said that the laws of physics are the same in all inertial
frames.

Actually, it was Poincare who stressed that; Lorentz and Einstein followed
up on his call. However, they first looked at the laws of mechanics and
electrodynamics.

[...]

That story further of the clocks lagging in time is stolen from Larmor

Out of context, and greatly exaggerated.

I recommend you get an historical text such as that by Jammer before you
continue with these accusations.

Such texts are useful as they point to the original papers. Reading the
original papers is really necessary to verify the accusations and claims
that are made about them.

It is a nice thing to be able to do. But, in the case of GR, you'd be
surprised at how few GRists have read Einstein's paper on GR.

Do you have a copy of that paper by Poincare written in English that you can
either refer me to or perhaps send me? Thanks Harold.

Best wishes

Pete

"harry" wrote in message
...

"Pmb" wrote in message
. ..

"Greatest Mining Pioneer of Australia of all Times"
wrote in message
oups.com...

E = mc² stolen from Henri Poincaré

I disagree regarding Poincaré. Have you actually *read* what Poincaré
wrote? I haven't and thus I don't make such accusations.

I did.

As I recall, that question was directed to the originator "Greatest Mining
Pioneer of Australia of all Times."

Its strange though. I can't find that post now!!! I think God is
playing tricks on ole Pete again! lol!!

Pete

"Pmb" wrote in message
. ..

"harry" wrote in message
...

"Pmb" wrote in message
. ..

"Greatest Mining Pioneer of Australia of all Times"
wrote in message
oups.com...

E = mc² stolen from Henri Poincaré

I disagree regarding Poincaré. Have you actually *read* what Poincaré
wrote? I haven't and thus I don't make such accusations.

I did.

As I recall, that question was directed to the originator "Greatest Mining
Pioneer of Australia of all Times."

Its strange though. I can't find that post now!!! I think God is
playing tricks on ole Pete again! lol!!

Pete

"Pmb" wrote in message
. ..

"harry" wrote in message
...

"Pmb" wrote in message
. ..

"Greatest Mining Pioneer of Australia of all Times"
wrote in message
oups.com...

E = mc² stolen from Henri Poincaré

I disagree regarding Poincaré. Have you actually *read* what Poincaré
wrote? I haven't and thus I don't make such accusations.

[But] I did. How can you disagree about something that you didn't read?!

That was explained in my last e-mail. I researched his work, remember?
www.

Apparently you disagreed with what you suspected to be hear-say, while
stating that you base that opinion on other hear-say...

[...]

I recommend you get an historical text such as that by Jammer before you
continue with these accusations.

Such texts are useful as they point to the original papers. Reading the
original papers is really necessary to verify the accusations and claims
that are made about them.

It is a nice thing to be able to do. But, in the case of GR, you'd be
surprised at how few GRists have read Einstein's paper on GR.

I'm aware of that.

Do you have a copy of that paper by Poincare written in English that you
can either refer me to or perhaps send me? Thanks Harold.

Sorry it's in French: "La théorie de Lorentz et le principe de réaction".
Note: My photocopy may very well be from an exemplar that was read by
Einstein. :-)

Best regards,
Harald

"harry" wrote in message
...

"Pmb" wrote in message
. ..

"harry" wrote in message
...

"Pmb" wrote in message
. ..

"Greatest Mining Pioneer of Australia of all Times"
wrote in message
oups.com...

E = mc² stolen from Henri Poincaré

I disagree regarding Poincaré. Have you actually *read* what Poincaré
wrote? I haven't and thus I don't make such accusations.

I did.

As I recall, that question was directed to the originator "Greatest
Mining Pioneer of Australia of all Times."

Its strange though. I can't find that post now!!! I think God is
playing tricks on ole Pete again! lol!!

Pete

"Pmb" wrote in message
. ..

"harry" wrote in message
...

"Pmb" wrote in message
. ..

"Greatest Mining Pioneer of Australia of all Times"
wrote in message
oups.com...

E = mc² stolen from Henri Poincaré

I disagree regarding Poincaré. Have you actually *read* what Poincaré
wrote? I haven't and thus I don't make such accusations.

[But] I did. How can you disagree about something that you didn't read?!

That was explained in my last e-mail. I researched his work, remember?
www.

Apparently you disagreed with what you suspected to be hear-say, while
stating that you base that opinion on other hear-say...

Jorunal articles and physics text are not considered to be hearsay. You
might consider them to be though.



[...]

I recommend you get an historical text such as that by Jammer before
you continue with these accusations.

Such texts are useful as they point to the original papers. Reading the
original papers is really necessary to verify the accusations and claims
that are made about them.

It is a nice thing to be able to do. But, in the case of GR, you'd be
surprised at how few GRists have read Einstein's paper on GR.

I'm aware of that.

Do you have a copy of that paper by Poincare written in English that you
can either refer me to or perhaps send me? Thanks Harold.

Sorry it's in French: "La théorie de Lorentz et le principe de réaction".

Darn.

Pete

"harry" wrote in message
...

"Pmb" wrote in message
. ..

"harry" wrote in message
...

"Pmb" wrote in message
. ..

"Greatest Mining Pioneer of Australia of all Times"
wrote in message
oups.com...

E = mc² stolen from Henri Poincaré

I disagree regarding Poincaré. Have you actually *read* what Poincaré
wrote? I haven't and thus I don't make such accusations.

I did.

As I recall, that question was directed to the originator "Greatest
Mining Pioneer of Australia of all Times."

Its strange though. I can't find that post now!!! I think God is
playing tricks on ole Pete again! lol!!

Pete

"Pmb" wrote in message
. ..

"harry" wrote in message
...

"Pmb" wrote in message
. ..

"Greatest Mining Pioneer of Australia of all Times"
wrote in message
oups.com...

E = mc² stolen from Henri Poincaré

I disagree regarding Poincaré. Have you actually *read* what Poincaré
wrote? I haven't and thus I don't make such accusations.

[But] I did. How can you disagree about something that you didn't read?!

That was explained in my last e-mail. I researched his work, remember?
www.

Apparently you disagreed with what you suspected to be hear-say, while
stating that you base that opinion on other hear-say...

I'm curious as to why you never mentioned the explanation I posted and why
you think its wrong? I wrote
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
The first in the list the author gives regarding the history of the
mass-energy relation is J.J. Thompson in 1885. It was not of the form E =
mc^2 but it related the increased inertia dm on a charged conducter in
motion. The next was by Oliver Heaviside in 1889 which gave another value
for dm. In 1900 Poincaré showed that electromagnetic energy has momentum. He
showed, according to Fadner, that this momentum ncan be represented by a
"fictitious fluid" with mass density rho = J/c^2 where J is the energy
density. At this point Poincaré had never assigned an energy to mass. He
assigned a mass to energy! The concept of mass in relativity wasn incomplete
until 1914. If you'd like I can e-mail this article to you.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
First off you never mentioned if you believe that the author's comment that,
paraphrased, reads '1900 Poincaré showed that electromagnetic energy has
momentum. This momentum ncan be represented by a "fictitious fluid" with
mass density rho = J/c^2 where J is the energy density.' It seems to mean
that Einstein's 1905 SR paper on energy and the "fictitious fluid" with mass
density rho = J/c^2 is the relationship in question. You said that you read
Poincaré's article on this. Did he say that the aforementioned momentum can
be represented by a "fictitious fluid" with mass density rho = J/c^2 where J
is the energy density? If youy believe this to be wrong then why didn't you
say so? If you believe this to be correct then in what way was Einstein
plagiarizing Poincaré since the topics were different and only had an
apparent similarity. While Poincaré was refering to radiation behaving like
a fluid with a certain mass density, Einstein showed that if a body losses
energy by the amount dE then the mass of the body will decrease by the
amount dm = dE/c^2.

I asked you if you'd like to read the paper by Fadner to see what his
arguement was on this topic and you showed no interest. I'm curious as to
why you want to contribute to this thread and yet not want to read an
article which is all about this particular topic? How else would you be able
to understand the author's conclusion? I/e.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Therefore, it is reasonable to associate the equation E = mc^2 with Einstein
as its chief developer, as
long as we realize that many others were involved in that development.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

I've done a research on this topic and its not as if they all disagree.
Since we can't all read various languages that articles are written in
doesn't mean we can't form opinions as to the conclusions the authors made
and as reported by historians on the subject. I assume you disagree with
this philosophy due to your previous response to my post. Please explain why
you find the above unreasonable?

Thanks

Pete