zhil at online.no
Sun Jul 1 18:56:57 EST 2001
I'll respond point by point what _I_ know.
"Marielle Fois" <im99_foa at nada.kth.se> skrev i melding
news:Pine.SOL.4.30.0107012006140.15515-100000 at my.nada.kth.se...
> I have just posted a message about this topic, saying I was answering
> to the document against Einstein's credibility. I decide to send my
> answer in this posting, which I wrote before knowing the document had
> been written by an antisemite person.
I copied it from a webpage after a google-search.
After I read through it, it seemed reasonable that a 'moronic' person
who passed a technical exam WITH DIFFICULTY (after several tries)
and worked at the patent-office in Bern was a fraud.
Usually I don't say this lightly, I've stepped on enough toes to know
my limits, and been hit by flak from others as well.......................
Ohh well, maybe I shouldn't worry about stepping one somebodies toes..
> Can you give references to the document you included about Einstein
> being a fraud. Where does it come from? I, personally, cannot take
> seriously a paper which has parts written in uppercase letters, and
> some of the comments I include:
I would suspect it if it had NO upper-case letters, but what's the matter ?
Unable to find proof that he wasn't moronic and a media-personality ?
The evidence he uses were worked out by the scientific community years
ahead of him, and if he _did_ revolutionize physics, why not a nobel-prize
for his E=mc² ?
Because it was already discovered; actually the formulae is a little more
complicated than this.
> On Sat, 30 Jun 2001, Brian wrote:
> > "ALBERT EINSTEIN is held up as "a rare genius," who drastically changed
> > field of theoretical physics. However, using the technique known as 'The
> > Often-Repeated Lie= Truth,' he has been made an idol to young people,
> > his very name has become synonymous with genius. THE TRUTH, HOWEVER, IS
> > DIFFERENT. Einstein was an inept & moronic person, who could not even
> > his own shoelaces;
> This is completely unserious.
It seems weird, but not unreasonable; if he couldn't get through an exam
(which I'd get through
with flying colours....), what credit do you think I'll give him ????
Then I'd expect myself to have a higher IQ than him, but I consider myself
> > [...] The Encyclopedia Britannica says of
> > Einstein's early education that he "showed little scholastic ability."
> This is not uncommon among respectful scientists. I once read a small
> biografy of Niels Bohr, and was amazed at the fact that he never
> understood things at first, and after a lecture, he would ask his
> friends to explain again for him what the teacher had explained.
<sigh> Niels Bohr was a _real_ scientist...................but I'd suspect
was smarter than he is portrayed here.
> Richard Feynman had also low scores in english and history and
> denied any validity of poetry and art (Ref. "Genius" by James
> Gleick.) Gregor Mendel was unable to pass the exam to get a high
> school teaching licence (Ref. "Inspired Amateurs" by Guinagh Kevin).
> Bénoit Mandelbrot failed at university in France, and fled from the
> french education because at that time the french school was denying
> using visual skills to imagine mathematical problems, arguing that
> formal methods must be sufficient (Ref. "Chaos" by James Gleick).
They were all geniuses, but they never had the backing Einstein had.
> > It
> > also says that at the age of 15, "with poor grades in history,
> > and languages, he left school with no diploma."
> I don't understand what they want to prove with this. Physics and
> mathematics have nothing to do with history, geography and languages.
> Weren't we talking about a multi dimentional iq tests?
If you're good in one field, it is very common to be good in another
That has been studied extensively.
About multi-dimensional IQ, I'd say that Einstein were good verbally, but
as he failed technically; his spatial IQ was less than desired.
Another genius Stephen Hawkins is uncapable of feeding himself, but he
doesn't lack genius in either area; thus I'm giving him far more respect
than the fraud called Einstein.
> > Einstein himself wrote in a
> > school paper of his "lack of imagination and practical ability."
> What they don't say is that, if my memory doesn't fail, Einstein
> wrote that in a letter to the director of the school where he wanted
> to enter, enphasizing his total lack of imagination and practical
> ability, and his fluency in mathematical and logical thinking,
> to motivate he was a good candidate for mathematics and physics
> studies. However, it didn't work.
And you proved what ?
That he were unable to use his imagination, and thus rendered his
'fluency in mathematics and logical thinking' moot, hmmm ??
If you're going somewhere, you'd got to have imagination enough to use
your mathematical and logical skills.
> > This exam consisted mainly of mathematical problems, and Einstein
> > himself to be mathematically inept in this exam. He then entered a
> > school hoping to use it as a stepping stone to the engineering school he
> > could not get into, but after graduating in 1900, he still could not get
> > position at the engineering school!
> From "Thinking in Pictures" by Temple Grandin
> (http://www.grandin.com/), pg 185:
> "I had to get through school by going through the back door,
> because I failed the math part of the Graduate Record Exam."
> Having a look at her web page, nobody would say this woman is inept.
> This is not just taken out of the blue, in this book, she writes a
> chapter about Einstein and about the posibility that Einstein was
Like 'Rainman' ?
Then why should the scientific community listen to such a character ?
They didn't hire him because of his grades......................
He was working in the patent-office.
How much credit would the scientific community give _you_ (or me) if we;out
of the blue; proposes the new GUT (Grand Unifying Theory) ??
Not much I'd say.
So I'll stick with the facts that I know, and not propose the new GUT if it
> > Unable to go to the school as he had wanted, he got a job (with the
> > a friend) at the patent office in Bern. He was to be a technical expert
> > third class, which meant that he was too incompetent for a higher
> > position.
> This person seems to have something personal against Einstein.
Include me, I hate it when frauds steal other persons work and claim it as
However, I've read that the person that developed the theory had to explain
it to Einstein and gave him copies before Einstein presented it.
How gullible and stupid is that ?
I'm sorry for Grossmann that he didn't do the right thing.
> > Supposedly, while working a full time job, without the aid of
> > colleagues, a staff of graduate students, a laboratory, or any of the
> > normally associated with an academic setting, Einstein in his spare time
> > wrote four ground-breaking essays in the field of theoretical physics
> > quantum mechanics that were published in 1905.
> > Many people have recognized the impossibility of such a feat,
> > Einstein himself, and therefore Einstein has led people to believe that
> > many of these ideas came to him in his sleep, out of the blue, because
> > indeed that is the only logical explanation of how an admittedly inept
> > moron could have written such documents at the age of 26 without any
> > education.
> This person has definetely something personal against Einstein.
And how does that _invalidate_ his/her claims ????
That would be the next question.
> > HOWEVER, THE TRUTH IS: HE STOLE THE IDEAS AND PLAGIARIZED THE PAPERS.
> This is not serious, you just don't write this in a paper. This is
I didn't write the paper.........
And you never gave an account or counter the information regarding the
came up later which you snipped.
I'll add it after my name.
HOWEVER, THE TRUTH IS: HE STOLE THE IDEAS AND PLAGIARIZED THE PAPERS.
Therefore, we will look at each of these ideas and discover the source of
each. It should be remembered that these ideas are presented by Einstein's
worshipers as totally new and completely different, each of which would
change the landscape of science. These four papers dealt with the following
four ideas, respectively:
1) The foundation of the photon theory of light;
2) The equivalence of energy and mass;
3) The explanation of Brownian motion in liquids;
4) The special theory of relativity.
Let us first look at the last of these theories, the theory of relativity.
This is perhaps the most famous idea falsely attributed to Einstein.
Specifically, this 1905 paper dealt with what Einstein called the Special
Theory of Relativity (the General Theory would come in 1915).
This theory contradicted the traditional Newtonian mechanics and was based
upon two premises:
1) in the absence of acceleration, the laws of nature are the same for all
2) since the speed of light is independent of the motion of its source,
then the time interval between two events is longer for an observer in
whose frame of reference the events occur at different places than for an
observer in whose frame of reference the events occur in the same place.
This is basically the idea that time passes more slowly as one's velocity
approaches the speed of light, relative to slower velocities where time
would pass faster. This theory has been validated by modern experiments and
is the basis for modern physics. But these two premises are far from being
originally Einstein's. FIRST OF ALL, THE IDEA THAT THE SPEED OF LIGHT WAS A
CONSTANT AND WAS INDEPENDENT OF THE MOTION OF ITS SOURCE WAS NOT EINSTEIN'S
AT ALL, BUT WAS PROPOSED BY THE SCOTTISH SCIENTIST JAMES MAXWELL in 1878.
Maxwell studied the phenomenon of light extensively and first proposed that
it was electromagnetic in nature.
James Maxwell wrote an article to this effect for the 1878 edition of the
Encyclopedia Britannica. His ideas prompted much debate, and by 1887, as a
result of his work and the ensuing debate, the scientific community,
particularly Lorentz, Michelson, and Morley reached the conclusion that the
velocity of light was independent of the velocity of the observer.
Thus, this piece of the Special Theory of Relativity was known 27 years
before Einstein wrote his paper. This debate over the nature of light also
led Michelson and Morley to conduct an important experiment, the results of
which could not be explained by Newtonian mechanics. They observed a
phenomenon caused by relativity but they did not understand relativity. They
had attempted to detect the motion of the earth through ether, which was a
medium thought to be necessary for the propagation of light.
In response to this problem, in 1880, the irish physicist George Fitz
Gerald, who had also first proposed a mechanism for producing radio waves,
wrote a paper which stated that the results of the michelson-morley
experiment could be explained if, "...the length of material bodies changes,
according as they are moving through the either or across it by an amount
depending on the square of the ratio of their velocities to that of light."
THIS IS THE THEORY OF RELATIVITY, 13 YEARS BEFORE EINSTEIN'S PAPER!
FURTHER... IN 1892, HENDRIK LORENTZ, of the Netherlands, proposed the same
solution and began to greatly expand the idea. All throughout the 1890's,
both Lorentz and FitzGerald worked on these ideas and wrote articles
strangely similar to Einstein's Special Theory detailing what is now known
as the Lorentz-Fitz Gerald Contraction.
In 1898, the Irishman Joseph Larmor wrote down equations explaining the
Lorentz-Fitzgerald contraction and its relativistic consequences, 7 years
before Einstein's paper. By 1904, "Lorentz transformations," the series of
equations explaining relativity, were published by Lorentz. They describe
the increase of mass, the shortening of length, and the time dilation of a
body moving at speeds close to the velocity of light. In short, by 1904,
everything in "Einstein's paper" regarding the Special Theory of Relativity
had already been published. The Frenchman Poincaré had, in 1898, written a
paper unifying many of these ideas. He stated seven years before Einstein's
paper: "...we have no direct intuition about the equality of two time
intervals. The simultaneity of two events or the order of their succession,
as well as the equality of two time intervals, must be defined in such a way
that the statements of the natural laws be as simple as possible." Anyone
who has read Einstein's 1905 paper will immediately recognize the similarity
and the lack of originality on the part of Einstein.
Thus, we see that the only thing original about the paper was the term
'Special Theory of Relativity.' EVERYTHING ELSE WAS PLAGIARIZED. Over the
next few years, Poincaré became one of the most important lecturers and
writers regarding relativity, but he never, in any of his papers or
speeches, mentioned Albert Einstein. Thus, while Poincaré was busy bringing
the rest of the academic world up to speed regarding relativity, Einstein
was still working in the patent office in Bern and no one in the academic
community thought it necessary to give much credence or mention to
Einstein's work. Most of these early physicists knew that he was a fraud.
This brings us to the explanation of Brownian motion, the subject of
another of Einstein's 1905 papers. Brownian motion describes the irregular
motion of a body arising from the thermal energy of the molecules of the
material in which the body is immersed. The movement had first been observed
by the Scottish botanist Robert Brown in 1827. The explanation of this
phenomenon has to do with the Kinetic Theory of Matter, and it was the
American Josiah Gibbs and the Austrian Ludwig Boltzmann who first explained
this occurrence, not Albert Einstein. In fact, the mathematical equation
describing the motion contains the famous Boltzmann constant, k. Between
these two men, they had explained by the 1890s everything in Einstein's 1905
paper regarding Brownian motion.
The subject of the equivalence of mass and energy was contained in a third
paper published by Einstein in 1905. This concept is expressed by the famous
equation E=mc2. Einstein's biographers categorize this as "his most famous
and most spectacular conclusion." Even though this idea is an obvious
conclusion of Einstein's earlier relativity paper, it was not included in
that paper but was published as an afterthought later in the year. Still,
the idea of energy-mass equivalence was not original with Einstein.
That there was an equivalence between mass and energy had been shown in the
laboratory in the 1890s by both J.J. Thomsom of Cambridge and by W. Kaufmann
in Göttingen. In 1900, Poincaré had shown that there was a mass relationship
for all forms of energy, not just electromagnetic energy. Yet, the most
probable source of Einstein's plagiarism was Friedrich Hasenöhrl, one of the
most brilliant, yet unappreciated physicists of the era. Hasenöhrl was the
teacher of many of the German scientists who would later become famous for a
variety of topics. He had worked on the idea of the equivalence of mass and
energy for many years and had published a paper on the topic in 1904 in the
very same journal which Einstein would publish his plagiarized version in
1905. For his brilliant work in this area, Hasenörhl had received in 1904 a
prize from the prestigious Vienna Academy of Sciences.
Furthermore, the mathematical relationship of mass and energy was a simple
deduction from the already well-known equations of Scottish physicist James
Maxwell. Scientists long understood that the mathematical relationship
expressed by the equation E=mc2 was the logical result of Maxwell's work,
they just did not believe it.
THUS, THE EXPERIMENTS OF THOMSON, KAUFMANN, AND FINALLY, AND MOST
IMPORTANTLY, HASENÖRHL, CONFIRMED MAXWELL'S WORK. IT IS LUDICROUS TO BELIEVE
THAT EINSTEIN DEVELOPED THIS POSTULATE, particularly in light of the fact
that Einstein did not have the laboratory necessary to conduct the
appropriate experiments. In this same plagiarized article of Einstein's, he
suggested to the scientific community, "Perhaps it will prove possible to
test this theory using bodies whose energy content is variable to a high
degree (e.g., salts of radium)." This remark demonstrates how little
Einstein understood about science, for this was truly an outlandish remark.
By saying this, Einstein showed that he really did not understand basic
scientific principles and that he was writing about a topic that he did not
understand. In fact, in response to this article, J. Precht remarked that
such an experiment "lies beyond the realm of possible experience." The last
subject dealt with in Einstein's 1905 papers was the foundation of the
photon theory of light. Einstein wrote about the photoelectric effect. The
photoelectric effect is the release of electrons from certain metals or
semiconductors by the action of light. This area of research is particularly
important to the Einstein myth because it was for this topic that he
UNJUSTLY received his 1922 Nobel Prize.
But AGAIN IT IS NOT EINSTEIN, BUT WILHELM WIEN AND MAX PLANCK WHO DESERVE
THE CREDIT. The main point of Einstein's paper, and the point for which he
is given credit, is that light is emitted and absorbed in finite packets
called quanta. This was the explanation for the photoelectric effect. The
photoelectric effect had been explained by Heinrich Hertz in 1888. Hertz and
others, including Philipp Lenard, worked on understanding this phenomenon.
Lenard was the first to show that the energy of the electrons released in
the photoelectric effect was not governed by the intensity of the light but
by the frequency of the light. This was an important breakthrough. Wien and
Planck were colleagues and they were the fathers of modern day quantum
theory. By 1900, Max Planck, based upon his and Wien's work, had shown that
radiated energy was absorbed and emitted in finite units called quanta. The
only difference in his work of 1900 and Einstein's work of 1905 was that
Einstein limited himself to talking about one particular type of energy
light energy. But the principles and equations governing the process in
general had been deduced by Planck in 1900. Einstein himself admitted that
the obvious conclusion of Planck's work was that light also existed in
discrete packets of energy. Thus, nothing in this paper of Einstein's was
After the 1905 papers of Einstein were published, the scientific community
took little notice and Einstein continued his job at the patent office until
1909 when it was arranged by World Jewry for him to take a position at a
school . Still, it was not until a 1919 A Jewish newspaper headline that he
gained any notoriety. With Einstein's academic appointment in 1909, he was
placed in a position where he could begin to use other people's work as his
own more openly.
He engaged many of his students to look for ways to prove the theories he
had supposedly developed, or ways to apply those theories, and then he could
present the research as his own or at least take partial credit. In this
vein, in 1912, he began to try and express his gravitational research in
terms of a new, recently developed calculus, which was conducive to
understanding relativity. This was the beginning of his General Theory of
Relativity, which he would publish in 1915.
BUT THE MATHEMATICAL WORK WAS NOT DONE BY EINSTEIN - HE WAS INCAPABLE OF
IT. Instead, it was performed by the mathematician Marcel Grossmann, who in
turn used the mathematical principles developed by Berhard Riemann, who was
the first to develop a sound non-Euclidean geometry, which is the basis of
all mathematics used to describe relativity.
The General Theory of Relativity applied the principles of relativity to the
universe; that is, to the gravitational pull of planets and their orbits,
and the general principle that light rays bend as they pass by a massive
object. Einstein published an initial paper in 1913 based upon the work
which Grossmann did, adapting the math of Riemann to Relativity. But this
paper was filled with errors and the conclusions were incorrect.
It appears that Grossmann was not smart enough to figure it out for
Einstein. So Einstein was forced to look elsewhere to plagiarize his General
Theory. Einstein published his correct General Theory of Relativity in 1915,
and said prior to its publication that he, "completely succeeded in
convincing Hilbert and Klein." He is referring to David Hilbert, perhaps the
most brilliantmathematician of the 20th century, and Felix Klein, another
mathematician who had been instrumental in the development of the area of
calculus that Grossmann had used to develop the General Theory of Relativity
Einstein's statement regarding the two men would lead the reader to believe
that Einstein had changed Hilbert's and Klein's opinions regarding General
Relativity, and that he had influenced them in their thinking.
However, the exact opposite is true. EINSTEIN STOLE THE MAJORITY OF HIS
GENERAL RELATIVITY WORK FROM THESE TWO MEN, THE REST BEING TAKEN FROM
GROSSMANN. HILBERT SUBMITTED FOR PUBLICATION, A WEEK BEFORE EINSTEIN
COMPLETED HIS WORK, A PAPER WHICH CONTAINED THE CORRECT FIELD EQUATIONS, OF
What this means is that Hilbert wrote basically the exact same paper, with
the same conclusions, before Einstein did. Einstein would have had an
opportunity to know of Hilbert's work all along, because there were friends
of his working for Hilbert. Yet, even this was not necessary, for Einstein
had seen Hilbert's paper in advance of publishing his own. Both of these
papers were, before being printed, delivered in the form of a lecture.
Einstein presented his paper on November 25, 1915 in Berlin and Hilbert had
presented his paper on November 20 in Göttingen. On November 18, Hilbert
received a letter from Einstein thanking him for sending him a draft of the
treatise Hilbert was to deliver on the 20th. So, in fact, Hilbert had sent a
copy of his work at least two weeks in advance to Einstein before either of
the two men delivered their lectures, but Einstein did not send Hilbert an
advance copy of his.
Therefore, THIS SERVES AS INCONTROVERTIBLE PROOF THAT EINSTEIN QUICKLY
PLAGIARIZED THE WORK AND THEN PRESENTED IT, HOPING TO BEAT HILBERT TO THE
PUNCH. Also, at the same time, Einstein publicly began to belittle Hilbert,
even though in the previous summer he had praised him in an effort to get
Hilbert to share his work with him. Hilbert made the mistake of sending
Einstein this draft copy, but still he delivered his work first. Not only
did Hilbert publish his work first, but it was of much higher quality than
Einstein's. It is known today that there are many problems with assumptions
made in Einstein's General Theory paper. We know today that Hilbert was much
closer to the truth. Hilbert's paper is the forerunner of the unified field
theory of gravitation and electromagnetism and of the work of Erwin
Schrödinger, whose work is the basis of all modern day quantum mechanics.
That the group of men discussed so far were the actual originators of the
ideas claimed by Einstein was known by the scientific community all along.
In 1940, a group of German physicists meeting in Austria declared that
"before Einstein, Aryan scientists like Lorentz, Hasenöhrl, Poincaré, etc.,
had created the foundations of the theory of relativity." However, the
Jewish media did not promote the work of these men. The Jewish media did not
promote the work of David Hilbert, but instead they promoted the work of the
Jew Albert Einstein.
As we mentioned earlier, this General Theory, as postulated by Hilbert
first and in plagiarized form by Einstein second, stated that light rays
should bend when they pass by a massive object. In 1919, during the eclipse
of the Sun, light from distant stars passing close to the Sun was observed
to bend according to the theory. This evidence supported the General Theory
of Relativity, and the Jxxxx-controlled media immediately seized upon the
opportunity to prop up Einstein as a hero, at the expense of the true
genius, David Hilbert. On November 7th, 1919, the London Times ran an
article, the headline of which proclaimed, "Revolution in science - New
theory of the Universe - Newtonian ideas overthrown." This was the beginning
of the force-feeding of the Einstein myth to the masses. In the following
years, Einstein's earlier 1905 papers were propagandized and Einstein was
heralded as the originator of all the ideas he had stolen. Because of this
push by the Jewish media, in 1922, EINSTEIN RECEIVED THE NOBEL PRIZE FOR THE
WORK HE HAD STOLEN IN 1905 REGARDING THE PHOTOELECTRIC EFFECT.
The establishment of the Einstein farce between 1919 and 1922 was an
important coup for world Zionism and Jewry. As soon as Einstein had been
established as an idol to the popular masses of England and America, his
image was promoted as the rare genius that he is erroneously believed to be
As such, he immediately began his work as a tool for World Zionism. The
masses bought into the idea that if someone was so brilliant as to change
our fundamental understanding of the universe, then certainly we ought to
listen to his opinions regarding political and social issues.
This is exactly what World Jewry wanted to establish in its ongoing effort
of social engineering. They certainly did not want someone like David
Hilbert to be recognized as rare genius. After all, this physicist had come
from a strong German, Christian background. His grandfather's two middle
names were 'Fürchtegott Leberecht' or 'Fear God, Live Right.' In August of
1934, the day before a vote was to be taken regarding installing Adolf
Hitler as President of the Reich, Hilbert signed a proclamation in support
of Adolf Hitler, along with other leading German scientists, that was
published in the German newspapers. So the Jews certainly did not want David
Hilbert receiving the credit he deserved. The Jews did not want Max Planck
receiving the credit he deserved either. This German's grandfather and
great-grandfather had been important German theologians, and during World
War II he would stay in Germany throughout the war, supporting his
fatherland the best he could. The Jews certainly did not want the
up-and-coming Erwin Schrödinger to be heralded as a genius to the masses.
This Austrian physicist would go on to teach at Adolf Hitler University in
Austria, and he wrote a public letter expressing his support for the Third
Reich. This Austrian's work on the unified field theory was a forerunner of
modern physics, even though it had been criticized by Einstein, who
apparently could not understand it.
The Jews did not want to have Werner Heisenberg promoted as a rare genius,
even though he would go on to solidify quantum theory and contribute to it
greatly, as well as develop his famous uncertainty principle, in addition to
describing the modern atom and nucleus and the binding energies that are
essential to modern chemistry.
NO, THE JEWS DID NOT WANT HEISENBERG PROMOTED AS A GENIUS BECAUSE HE WOULD
GO ON TO HEAD THE GERMAN ATOMIC BOMB PROJECT AND SERVE PRISON TIME AFTER THE
WAR FOR HIS INVOLVEMENT WITH THE THIRD REICH. No, the Jews did not want to
give credit to any of a number of Germans, Austrians, Irishmen, Frenchmen,
Scotsmen, Englishmen, and even Americans who had contributed to the body of
knowledge and evidence from which Einstein plagiarized and stole his work.
Instead, they needed to erect Einstein as their golden calf, even though he
repeatedly and often embarrassed himself with his nonfactual or nearsighted
comments regarding the work he had supposedly done. For example, in 1934,
the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette ran a front page article in which Einstein gave
an "emphatic denial" regarding the idea of practical applications for the
"energy of the atom." The article says, "But the 'energy of the atom' is
something else again. If you believe that man will someday be able to
harness this boundless energyto drive a great steamship across the ocean on
a pint of water, for instancethen, according to Einstein, you are wrong"
Again, Einstein clearly did not understand the branch of physics he had
supposedly founded, though elsewhere in the world at the time theoretical
research was underway that would lead to the atomic bomb and nuclear energy.
But after Einstein was promoted as a god in 1919, he made no real attempts
to plagiarize any other work. Rather, he began his real purpose evangelizing
for the cause of Zionism and World Jewry. Though he did publish other
articles after this time, all of them were co-authored by at least one other
person, and in each instance, Einstein had little if anything to do with the
research that led to the articles; he was merely recruited by the co-authors
in order to lend credence to their work. Thus freed of the pretense of
academia, Einstein began his assault for World Zionism.
More information about the Neur-sci