Prev: CERN, LHC, strangelet = droplet of death. Copy this letter and send it to another forum; to physicists, politicians, prosecutors, terrorists; to citizens of Geneva and so on.
Next: NATURE: A CoGeNT result in the hunt for dark matter [?]
From: Darwin123 on 1 Mar 2010 15:17
On Mar 1, 12:55 pm, Marvin the Martian <mar...(a)ontomars.org> wrote:
> On Mon, 01 Mar 2010 09:51:06 -0800, James Dow Allen wrote:
> > On Mar 2, 12:17 am, carlip-nos...(a)physics.ucdavis.edu wrote:

> There is good reason to say that Einstein borrowed heavily from others.
> Very good reason. Only fools dismiss that as Nazism.
Shakespeare borrowed greatly from Marlowe. Even Shakespeare
thought he was inferior to Marlowe. Only fools would dismiss
Shakespeare as a great writer based on this "borrowing".
Defending ones culture against Nazis is depressing. I would rather
praise the German people as a whole.
The German education system, among other great things, produced
Einstein. I would have to say Einstein got a lot out of the German
educational system that he later scorned. The German education system,
previous to the Nazis, was the greatest in the world. The Nazis ruined
the German reputation for scholarship (a little bit). However, I
admire Einsteins classmates and teachers almost as much as I admire
Einstein.
From: Raymond Yohros on 1 Mar 2010 15:20
On Mar 1, 11:56 am, Urion <blackman_...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
> But he wasn't a good physicist since manipulating complicated
> mathematical equations doesn't equal of doing good physics.
>
he was an incredible physicist
and that is the reason of his simple and
elegant math!!!

r.y
From: PD on 1 Mar 2010 15:39
On Mar 1, 10:46 am, James Dow Allen <jdallen2...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
> My website has a wide variety of pages, including one where I say
> flattering
> things about Einstein, implying he and Newton are the two greatest
> physicists
> ever.  I'm not a physicist, and not qualified to judge, but the claim
> agrees
> with almost all the facts and opinions I've ever read.
>
> Lately two readers have sent me e-mail implying that I've been deluded
> into thinking Einstein was really so great!
> Here's just an example of several claims I've received:
>
> > There is no question that Hilbert presented the General Theory of
> > Relativity before Einstein did.
> > Einstein rushed his  General Relativity paper into publication in a
> > panic when he saw that Hilbert had already presented his own Theory.
>
> My question for the ng is:  Is there any valid basis whatsoever to
> such
> arguments of plagiarism or against Einstein's "greatness"?
> I e-mailed one correspondent that such talk may have originated with
> anti-Semitic Nazi propaganda, which naturally infuriated him!
>
> Sorry if this post fans flames in this ng, but I do hope the ng gives
> me a clear sense of the answer.
>
> James Dow Allen

Various posters have different ideas about the criteria for
establishing greatness, very few of which are actually in synch with
what scientists generally give praise for. Those alternate criteria
include:
* making a key invention that changes everyday life for the common
person -- like cheap, unlimited power
* working in total isolation and yet being wholly responsible for a
theory ex nihilo, from soup to nuts, without any reference to or
utilization of previous work
* changing the way that 3rd graders would understand nature, as
opposed to the topic being reserved for special study by dedicated
students

There are those who also just despise the idea of *any* person being
lauded, and generally seek reasons to minimize the contributions. It's
a general campaign against perceived elitism and meritocracy, whereby
the average man is elevated by shaving off the accomplishments of the
more talented. It happens in music, law, politics, biology,
architecture, acting, and any number of pursuits. There are ALWAYS
"ain't so great" hecklers.

In answer to your question, essentially ALL great accomplishments in
science have been built upon significant contributions from
predecessors. None of them can claim sole ownership of the ideas, or
the theoretical development, or for that matter completeness of the
resulting theory. Greatness is a often the earmark of someone who
*synthesizes* others' ideas into a more compelling whole, or who
pursues an idea further than someone else with the same idea at the
same time. Sometimes, greatness is not afforded to the one who had the
original idea, but the one who made the seminal step to turn the idea
into something truly workable. The greatness is estimated by how much
the work of others has been influenced by the work of this person.
Even then, many physicists can claim this for one particular area of
work. But people like Newton and Einstein and Feynman did it over and
over again, making these key contributions that influenced future work
in several different topics.

That being said, Newton and Einstein and Feynman also made big
mistakes as well. So being "lily white" perfect isn't a criterion
either.

PD
From: HardySpicer on 1 Mar 2010 16:47
On Mar 2, 5:46 am, James Dow Allen <jdallen2...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
> My website has a wide variety of pages, including one where I say
> flattering
> things about Einstein, implying he and Newton are the two greatest
> physicists
> ever.  I'm not a physicist, and not qualified to judge, but the claim
> agrees
> with almost all the facts and opinions I've ever read.
>
> Lately two readers have sent me e-mail implying that I've been deluded
> into thinking Einstein was really so great!
> Here's just an example of several claims I've received:
>
> > There is no question that Hilbert presented the General Theory of
> > Relativity before Einstein did.
> > Einstein rushed his  General Relativity paper into publication in a
> > panic when he saw that Hilbert had already presented his own Theory.
>
> My question for the ng is:  Is there any valid basis whatsoever to
> such
> arguments of plagiarism or against Einstein's "greatness"?
> I e-mailed one correspondent that such talk may have originated with
> anti-Semitic Nazi propaganda, which naturally infuriated him!
>
> Sorry if this post fans flames in this ng, but I do hope the ng gives
> me a clear sense of the answer.
>
> James Dow Allen

You missed James Clark Maxwell. He was as great as the other two.

Hardy
From: Androcles on 1 Mar 2010 17:42

"HardySpicer" <gyansorova(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
news:a501d64d-069f-41ff-a591-ac54dd02242b(a)p3g2000pra.googlegroups.com...
On Mar 2, 5:46 am, James Dow Allen <jdallen2...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
> My website has a wide variety of pages, including one where I say
> flattering
> things about Einstein, implying he and Newton are the two greatest
> physicists
> ever. I'm not a physicist, and not qualified to judge, but the claim
> agrees
> with almost all the facts and opinions I've ever read.
>
> Lately two readers have sent me e-mail implying that I've been deluded
> into thinking Einstein was really so great!
> Here's just an example of several claims I've received:
>
> > There is no question that Hilbert presented the General Theory of
> > Relativity before Einstein did.
> > Einstein rushed his General Relativity paper into publication in a
> > panic when he saw that Hilbert had already presented his own Theory.
>
> My question for the ng is: Is there any valid basis whatsoever to
> such
> arguments of plagiarism or against Einstein's "greatness"?
> I e-mailed one correspondent that such talk may have originated with
> anti-Semitic Nazi propaganda, which naturally infuriated him!
>
> Sorry if this post fans flames in this ng, but I do hope the ng gives
> me a clear sense of the answer.
>
> James Dow Allen

You missed James Clark Maxwell. He was as great as the other two.

Hardy

==================================================
You missed Percival Lowell. He was greater than the other two, he
actually saw canals on Mars whereas Maxwell and Einstein only
hallucinated their crackpottery. That's much better greatness than
hearing voices.

First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Prev: CERN, LHC, strangelet = droplet of death. Copy this letter and send it to another forum; to physicists, politicians, prosecutors, terrorists; to citizens of Geneva and so on.
Next: NATURE: A CoGeNT result in the hunt for dark matter [?]