> That must have been a very interesting paper you wrote. I would love to read > it sometime. I'll have to call my dead prof. to see if he still has it somewhere.
> My only comment would be that during their marriage A.E. would have been > influenced both by his wife and by his work at the patent office. And that takes us to the other major group of Einstein detractors, those that argue that he was a blatant and serial plagiarizer. I do not remember anyone arguing that he stole ideas from the patent office, but there was a bunch of grumbling that he did from fellow physicists, ones that were already accomplished, and therefore did not mind sharing their work with a student (at the time) when he asked for copies. I am not making the following argument, I am just regurgitating it. I have not researched it, so I am just digging into the pit of trivia to toss out the nugget. Again, if memory serves me right, one of the major red flags is the fact that the paper on mass-energy equivalency (e=mc^2, i.e. special relativity) lacks a single footnote, which is at best suspicious, given that other "physicists" (more like hobbyists) were already working in this area, and, like most major revolutions in Physics, it was scoffed at (similar to Planck's mathematical supposition of the existence of quanta before the photoelectric effect was demonstrated). _______________________________________________ use-revolution mailing list [email protected] Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
