It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Was Einstein a fake?

page: 1
1
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 22 2008 @ 05:59 AM
link   
I have noticed many times that people (ATS and elswhere) tend to quote - or misquote - Albert Einstein in thier arguments. Is the work of Einstein to be taken as gospel? Is much of it correct?
While he was a clever mathemetitian and phycisist alot of the the work claimed to be his was belonged to someone else. his wife Mileva for instance was a much more educated and talented scientist and probably is the person responsible for alot of his works.
His work in the patent office also gave him opportunity to claim and rework other peoples ideas.
The most famous equation in the world E=mc^2 in fact belongs to Olinto De Pretto.
Besides this, some of his work has been either discredited or at best questioned in recent times.
Much of his work although clever and mind boggling to many of us was only theory explained in such a way that the unknowing can only accept it as they cannot query it.




posted on Mar, 22 2008 @ 08:59 AM
link   
You know, Elisha Gray invented the telephone, but a guy by the name of Bell beat him on a patent.

Einstein had a better press agent which is why the equation is related to him and not the obscure Italian.

As for him being clever, you lack the proper words to describe his work; or, your trying to be "clever".

Einstein built a foundation for future mathematicians and physicists to built upon. His basic work is solid and has been refined. Some of his work has been further expanded into new fields of science, and some of his work is just too advanced for science to currently explain. (kinda like some of Tesla's work)

You have made some bold statements involving his work actually being done by others. Without a formal knowledge of mathematics and physics, a person has to take the knowledge produced by others who do understand, what was actually said or done. Einstein is considered one of the greatest scientist of all time.



posted on Mar, 22 2008 @ 09:05 AM
link   
Einstein could be (and probably have been) wrong. Aristotle's view on universe was accepted for a while. Wrong. Newton - also wrong. Logically to assume Einstein - wrong. We develop with time and so see how the universe works better and better. Nothing is an axiom.



posted on Mar, 24 2008 @ 07:49 AM
link   
A couple of things I would like to clarify


Originally posted by hinky
You know, Elisha Gray invented the telephone, but a guy by the name of Bell beat him on a patent.

Are you saying Einstein just got in quicker? De Pretto had published the equation at least twice before Eistein saw it...


As for him being clever, you lack the proper words to describe his work; or, your trying to be "clever".


I think this is an accurate description. He was impressive but not necessarily the 'genious' that people worship



Without a formal knowledge of mathematics and physics, a person has to take the knowledge produced by others who do understand, what was actually said or done. Einstein is considered one of the greatest scientist of all time.


I agree here, but I also said that he was 'clever' and that he did know what he was talking about but knowing the information does not = creating the information.
You said it yourself. he had a good press agent. There are many people much more intelligent (then and now) but have not been recognized. Being published is not necessarily brilliance.

This will get me into alot of trouble but I didnt invent this, I only heard it...
We have all heard that no one knows his last words as he spoke them in German and the nurse with him did not speak German. There is also a story that his last words were in fact a confession of plagiarism but was kept quite. I am not saying it is true, just what I heard



posted on Mar, 24 2008 @ 08:01 AM
link   
reply to post by VIKINGANT
 


Albert Einstein never saw himself as a genius put on a pedistal to worship.

Are there any moderators in this forum to limit this kind of spam, or does free-speech allow for this misguided dogma to continue?



posted on Mar, 24 2008 @ 08:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kinesis
reply to post by VIKINGANT
 


Albert Einstein never saw himself as a genius put on a pedistal to worship.

Are there any moderators in this forum to limit this kind of spam, or does free-speech allow for this misguided dogma to continue?


This very post is questioning the air of superiority that surrounds Einstein, it is questioning the dogma of following his work without questioning it. Seems to me like if anything, this thread is the very opposite of dogma. It is not spam, it is a valid question. Now either contribute to the thread or please kindly stop trying to derail the conversation.

On topic : Einstein was no doubt a clever man, but the extent to which he is glorified has always been a bone of contention with me. In his great debates with Nielhs Bohr, it was Bohr who won.

It is my opinion that Newton's work has been disproved in one sense, as shall Einstein's be disproved by quantum physics.



posted on Mar, 24 2008 @ 09:03 AM
link   
Einstein was quoted saying that in the future he hoped all his theories would be disproved. I cant find where i read that, sorry.



posted on Mar, 24 2008 @ 09:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by VIKINGANT
I have noticed many times that people (ATS and elswhere) tend to quote - or misquote - Albert Einstein in thier arguments. Is the work of Einstein to be taken as gospel? Is much of it correct?


Einstein is misquoted much of the time, true. His equations, however, give a keen insight into the way things work, and have allowed other scientists to continue the eternal quest called science.

We can debate for the next ten years on whether he was solely responsible for the work he published, or whether he plagiarized someone else. In the end, it doesn't matter. The world now attributes E=mc^2 to Albert Einstein. So if I refer to 'Einstein's famous mass-energy equation', it is readily understood. If I refer to 'DePretto's famous mass-energy equation', few will know which equation I am talking about.

No one in human memory has developed a theory without a foundation laid by others. Ben Franklin is said to have discovered electricity. No. Electricity was already known, just not very well understood when he flew his kite. The details of that are also wrong. It appears from history that he simply tied a kite string to an apparatus he had built and let the wind in a storm fly it. He was smart enough to be a safe distance away. He also didn't use a key; he attached the string to a Leyden Jar (early capacitor) and tried to prove lightning was electricity.

It doesn't matter now that he didn't actually discover electricity. He contributed to our understanding of it. Bell didn't come up with the idea of transmitting voice over wires; he perfected it. Newton didn't come up with his laws in a vacuum either; he was an accomplished mathematician before he watched an apple fall (and it didn't hit him on the head, either),

Point being, science is a journey. We understand things slightly beyond the knowledge that we learn form others, then try to understand more. Sometimes we get it wrong until someone points out the error. Credit, in the form of recognition, money, fame, etc., is not always granted to those who did the work. Science is not advanced by these things, but by the need to know and understand. That reward always goes to the right people.

In today's society, we have elevated the scientist to the level of Demigod. We use the technologies they conceptualize and engineers build in our daily lives, and find security in the 'fact' that the scientists know all and can do all. They can't. They never will be able to. They are simply people trying to understand, by devoting their lives to the cause of understanding.


Much of his work although clever and mind boggling to many of us was only theory explained in such a way that the unknowing can only accept it as they cannot query it.


Incorrect. I question Einstein's theories all the time. So can anyone else. All they need to do is read them and study until they understand. And isn't that more fruitful a quest than attacking because one doesn't understand?

TheRedneck



posted on Mar, 24 2008 @ 09:19 AM
link   
reply to post by Optix
 

It's in one of my books. I don't have time to search it out right now, but he was referring to the fact that E=mc^2 was used to construct an atomic bomb.

Even though he actually worked with the US in developing the bomb, he always regretted it. Einstein loved peace, and in his waning years, spent much of his time in sorrow over the fact that his attempts to further science led to such a terrible weapon.

TheRedneck



posted on Mar, 24 2008 @ 10:09 AM
link   
reply to post by Kinesis
 


To Question dogma, be it right or wrong, is the freedom that ATS provides.

We learn by questioning. Even today, in scientific circles, some of "The Great Man's" ideas are being questioned. It is a long tradition, this asking if the geniuses of yesterday are still to be thought of in the same light.



posted on Mar, 24 2008 @ 11:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by NGC2736
reply to post by Kinesis
 


To Question dogma, be it right or wrong, is the freedom that ATS provides.

We learn by questioning. Even today, in scientific circles, some of "The Great Man's" ideas are being questioned. It is a long tradition, this asking if the geniuses of yesterday are still to be thought of in the same light.



If you really want to celebrate the life of a genius, how about reading up on Gabriel Kron. There's a lot to be learned from the examples he has set in his life, through hard honest work, selfless charity, and the brilliant works described in the books he has written. To know very little about somebody, and judge them based on what society portrays in a form of mockery. Questionning whether any of these men are fake is just a form of arrogance.



posted on Mar, 24 2008 @ 12:25 PM
link   
I actually posted a thread similar to this one sometime back. There is much debate as to just how "brilliant" Einstein was.. Einstein, being the humble person that he was would say "not very," but to the rest of the world he was. Here is the thread I posted a while back about Einstein.

Was Einstein a Plagiarist?



posted on Mar, 24 2008 @ 06:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kinesis
To know very little about somebody, and judge them based on what society portrays in a form of mockery. Questionning whether any of these men are fake is just a form of arrogance.


We are actually challenging the public perception of this man. Why are you finding it so hard to understand that we are challenging dogma.

It is not borne of arrogance, we are not trying to say that Einstein was just a regular joe who struck lucky. We are just questioning if the fame ascribed to them is just.

Seriously, how can you close off your thinking to such an extent? Do you mean to say as soon as someone mentions Einstein, everyone else should start jumping about saying "Oh he was a genius, he was a genius".

We reserve the right to question anything and everything, because we accept nothing at face value. This is the sprit of science... and i have no doubt that Einstein would have agreed with us.



posted on Mar, 24 2008 @ 06:55 PM
link   
reply to post by VIKINGANT
 



Well, strictly speaking, some (not very many) argue that much of his hypotheses were actually his first wife's idea - or at the very least, that he developed them in close collaboration with her (as you will remember, she was also a physicist).

That still wouldn't make him a "fake", though.



posted on Mar, 28 2008 @ 10:25 PM
link   
People keep saying that Newton's theories have been disproved; and Einstein's have been disproved. Last time I checked, apples still fall from trees and relativity is, well, quite relevant. Just because older theories do not comply with newer and newer theories does not mean that they are WRONG, it just means that--at worst--they are incomplete. The holy grail of physics is a unified field theory, and that will only be achieved by piecing information together bit by bit, over time--like a giant jigsaw puzzle. But the puzzle will only make sense if the pieces fit (i.e. Newton and Einstein theories, among many others of course).The foundations of knowledge in physics and mathematics that have been laid down by Newton's and Einstein's "wrong" theories have increased our species' understanding of the universe so drastically that I would say if one proclaims those theories to be WRONG then you're a damn fool.



posted on Mar, 29 2008 @ 08:34 AM
link   
If he was fake that means that the whole of science is fake?



posted on Mar, 30 2008 @ 06:20 AM
link   
Some people are just simply not understanding what I am trying to say. I am NOT saying he was a basic moron or that everything he said or wrote was a pile of faecal matter. Just that not all of the work attributed to him was his and that some of what he did say and write has been and is being justifiably questioned/debated.
Yes he was intelligent, but was he as intelligent as he has been out to be?
Way too many people are saying Einstein said therefore it it is so.....



posted on Mar, 30 2008 @ 08:11 AM
link   
Yes i have grown up beliving that he is a legend beyond legends so there for i think that its how you grow up that u belive in was he says.

Mod edit: Please review this link
Please Avoid Using TXT Shorthand On ATS

[edit on 30/3/2008 by watch_the_rocks]



posted on Mar, 30 2008 @ 10:12 PM
link   
reply to post by ohhhh well
 

This to me seems like a strange statement fro man ATser of all people. I know we all have our own beliefs in certain things, but we also should have some degree of open mind.
I really dont want to dump on you beliefs (Far too much of that here already
) but I grew up for a number of years believing Santa snuck into my house on Xmas eve to deliver the pressies. As I learned more I adjusted my beliefs accordingly.



posted on Mar, 30 2008 @ 10:31 PM
link   
reply to post by VIKINGANT
 


Do you have any real proof? Documents? Sorry, but on a matter as important as this, I hardly doubt citing an internet source is going to get it done.



new topics

top topics



 
1
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join