Re: Mileva Maric Einstein
From: Australopithecus Afarensis (fossil.lucy_at_cox.net)
Date: 07/23/04
- Next message: Bill Hobba: "Re: There is no gap between philosophy and physics - is belief evil?"
- Previous message: David Evens: "Re: GOD=G_uv INVISIBLE WORLD"
- In reply to: Patrick Reany: "Re: Mileva Maric Einstein"
- Next in thread: Patrick Reany: "Re: Mileva Maric Einstein"
- Reply: Patrick Reany: "Re: Mileva Maric Einstein"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2004 22:05:28 -0700
> 1,905 papers? Ha! What a case of writer's cramps! Are these supposed
> to be papers submitted to physics journals? If so, where the hell was
> the rest of the physics community when all these papers were being
> co-signed by them both?
According to Bjerknes, these papers were not co-signed. They were signed
with 'Einstein-Marity" which is exactly how Einstein's wife would haved
signed her last name. You can dispute that. From all the conversations
(more like shoutng match) I have observed, the only way to disprove
Bjerknes' claim is to destroy his credibility. Hey, I know how that goes.
That is a tremendous weakness in your part. You represent the faith, while
Bjerknes to me represents the logic or scientific method.
So, Patrick, if your faith is bruised, you don't have to take it out on me
or any one. It is your own fault for discussing scientific matters in a
science forum. Try alt.religion instead. If it makes you feel better,
please replace the words 'the lord' with 'Einstein' whenever you read your
Bible. So, praise the Lord. Oops, I mean praise Einstein. Amen.
> Why did Mileva NEVER amount to a prominent physicist on her own talent
> after the divorce? After all, Madame Curie was accepted on her own
> talent, so we KNOW that women were NOT excluded. Even Noether was well
> received. So if Mileva was so talented, why do we have no clear and
> direct proof of it?
Whoever derived Lorentz Transform like Einstein (or Einstein-Marity) did was
ingenious. There is no doubt about that. He/she did not even have to
resort to the Michelson-Morley Experiment to do so. However, some one did
it already. It is like the Japanese build the best VCRs in the world, but
that does not mean the Japanese invented VCRs. So, Mileva, if she is indeed
the person behind 'Einstein-Marity', is a clever person all right but still
not very original.
Einstein is by far the most famous scientist ever to have his career to be
interpreted in many ways because of so many controversies. Hell, as an amat
eur, I am even able to look at his first year physics lecture notes and
determine that he only made it into that class 20% of the time. That showed
a tremendous disinterest in the field of physics. But who knows. Maybe
some day we will discredit all these accusations against his good name. In
the meantime, the difference between you and I is that you dwell on faith.
If I want to respect a scientist, he or she'd better be ever so beyond any
reasons of doubt. Sorry, Patrick, I don't have faith like you do.
Praise Einstein! Amen! Feel better?
- Next message: Bill Hobba: "Re: There is no gap between philosophy and physics - is belief evil?"
- Previous message: David Evens: "Re: GOD=G_uv INVISIBLE WORLD"
- In reply to: Patrick Reany: "Re: Mileva Maric Einstein"
- Next in thread: Patrick Reany: "Re: Mileva Maric Einstein"
- Reply: Patrick Reany: "Re: Mileva Maric Einstein"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
