Einstein was a fraud

Did Einstein cheat his first wife out of a Nobel prize?
When Einstein suspected that he would win the Nobel Prize for his paper showing time is relative — the infamous E = mc2 — he dumped all his prize money to his first wife, Mileva Marić.

Some argue that this is was merely a form of alimony and child support, not even an uncommon one among divorced Nobel winners. But others — including the not-so-implicit arguments made by National Geographic’s Genius — argue that these payments represented atonement for Einstein’s alleged decision to claim his wife’s efforts towards his discoveries as his own.

First things first: There’s no hard evidence that Marić collaborated in a meaningful way to Einstein’s research, nor can it be irrefutably shown that Einstein stole her ideas. But an analysis of the letters that they wrote to each other has given enough weight to the idea that Marić played an important role in developing the famous thought experiments that are attributed solely to Einstein.

This theory is the basis for Marić’s portrayal in Genius, where Marić grows increasingly frustrated as her husband takes her ideas and runs with them, eventually overlooking her contributions and celebrating their success as his own.

The foundation for the argument of Einstein as idea-thief comes from some of Einstein’s letters to Marić. In particular, he wrote in one 1901 letter, “How happy and proud I will be when the two of us together will have brought our work on the relative motion to a victorious conclusion!” Some argue that this — along with other letters where Einstein uses phrases like “our research” — provide support for the notion that Marić was more involved in her husband’s scientific endeavors than history suggests.

Critics of this idea, who remain unconvinced that Marić could have helped, point out that Einstein wrote about detailed scientific concepts to Marić much more than she did to him. They argue that Einstein was merely bouncing ideas off of his wife, not working with her in a scientific partnership. But just as Einstein’s word choice doesn’t necessarily prove that Marić contributed, the absence of technical terms in her letters doesn’t mean that she didn’t — particularly because most of Marić’s letters were destroyed, along with some earlier drafts of Einstein’s work.

Critics also like to point out that Marić failed out of school, arguing that her understanding of math and physics must have paled in comparison to Einstein’s. It’s true that Marić never received a diploma, but it’s important to note that she took her final exams — her entrance and midterm grades were better or the same as Einstein’s — while pregnant with her and Einstein’s first child, a daughter who either died or was adopted shortly after birth. Also, Marić was the only woman in her class and the only one who failed the final exams that were given by older male professors who may have wanted to keep their field masculine.

Again, these don’t prove that Marić was responsible for discoveries attributed to Einstein, but it means that the common arguments saying that she couldn’t have are bunk. Coupled with the fact that Einstein reportedly saw Marić as his intellectual equal, it is certainly possible that Einstein collaborated with his wife on much, if not all, of his research.

Some of Einstein’s letters to Marić suggest that certain scientific endeavors were collaborative while others were not. In several letters, Einstein was very specific about whose ideas were whose. In one, he wrote “The local Prof. Weber is very nice to me and shows interest in my investigations. I gave him our paper,” referring to two separate projects.

Looking at multiple letters that refer to the same project over time, it is likely that Marić played an early collaborative role in some ideas, but as time went on Einstein viewed them more and more as his own. All of Einstein’s papers bore his name and his name alone, even though it’s accepted by both sides of the debate that Marić did much of Einstein’s research, spending time at the library gathering information that he — or they — would later use.

Whether or not Einstein stole his wife’s work at the turn of the twentieth century, one thing is accepted by both sides of the debate: that Marić was an instrumental part of Einstein’s professional development.

Even if this claim it’s false, there is no denying that this guy was not the genius history wants us to believe.

was he a thief, a liar and a plagiarist?

ALBERT EINSTEIN is held up as “a rare genius,” who drastically changed the field of theoretical physics. However, using the technique known as ‘The Often-Repeated Lie=Truth,’ he has been made an idol to young people, and his very name has become synonymous with genius.
THE TRUTH, HOWEVER, IS VERY DIFFERENT. Einstein was an inept and moronic person, who could not even tie his own shoelaces; he contributed NOTHING ORIGINAL to the field of quantum mechanics, nor any other science. On the contrary—he stole the ideas of others, and the media made him a ‘hero.’
When we actually examine the life of Albert Einstein, we find that his only ‘brilliance’ was in his ability to PLAGIARIZE and STEAL OTHER PEOPLE’S IDEAS, PASSING THEM OFF AS HIS OWN. Einstein’s education, or lack thereof, is an important part of this story.

The Encyclopedia Britannica says of Einstein’s early education that he “showed little scholastic ability.” It also says that at the age of 15, “with poor grades in history, geography, and languages, he left school with no diploma.” Einstein himself wrote in a school paper of his “lack of imagination and practical ability.” In 1895, Einstein failed a simple entrance exam to an engineering school in Zurich.
This exam consisted mainly of mathematical problems, and Einstein showed himself to be mathematically inept in this exam. He then entered a lesser 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 a position at the engineering school!
Unable to go to the school as he had wanted, he got a job (with the help of a friend) at the patent office in Bern. He was to be a technical expert third class, which meant that he was not competent to hold a higher qualified position. Even after publishing his so-called ground-breaking papers of 1905 and after working in the patent office for six years, he was only elevated to a second class standing. Remember, the work he was doing at the patent office, for which he was only rated third class, was not quantum mechanics or theoretical physics, but was reviewing technical documents for patents of every day things; yet he was barely qualified.
He would work at the patent office until 1909, all the while continuously trying to get a position at a university, but without success. All of these facts are true, but now begins the myth.
Supposedly, while working a full time job, without the aid of university colleagues, a staff of graduate students, a laboratory, or any of the things normally associated with an academic setting, Einstein in his spare time wrote four ground-breaking essays in the field of theoretical physics and quantum mechanics that were published in 1905.
Many people have recognized the impossibility of such a feat, including 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 real education. 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:

  • The foundation of the photon theory of light;
  • The equivalence of energy and mass;
  • The explanation of Brownian motion in liquids;
  • 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 observers; and
  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 Fitzgerald, 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 change, 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.”


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-Fitzgerald 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.”

Professor Umberto Bartocci, a mathematical historian, of the University of Perugia claims that Olinto De Pretto, an industrialist from Vicenza, published the equation E=mc^2 in a scientific magazine, Atte, in 1903. Einstein allegedly used De Pretto’s insight in a major paper published in 1905, but De Pretto was never acclaimed.

De Pretto had stumbled on the equation, but not the theory of relativity, while speculating about ether in the life of the universe, said Prof Bartocci. It was republished in 1904 by Veneto’s Royal Science Institute, but the equation’s significance was not understood.

According to Professor Bartocci, a Swiss Italian named Michele Besso alerted Einstein to the research and in 1905 Einstein published his own work. It took years for his breakthrough to be grasped. When the penny finally dropped, De Pretto’s contribution was overlooked while Einstein went on to become the century’s most famous scientist. De Pretto died in 1921.

“De Pretto did not discover relativity but there is no doubt that he was the first to use the equation. That is hugely significant. I also believe, though it’s impossible to prove, that Einstein used De Pretto’s research,” said Professor Bartocci, who has written a book on the subject. ( The Guardian Unlimited).

Anyone who has read Einstein’s 1905 paper will immediately recognize the similarity and the lack of originality on the part of Einstein.

In conclusion
Anyone who has studied much Physics will tell you that Special Relativity was mostly created by Poincare and Lorentz. The seminal 1905 paper by the plagiarist Einstein had no references! His 1915 paper on General Relativity, was submitted for publication two weeks after Hilbert’s deduction of the equations, and it is Hilbert’s Lagrangian technique that is used today to derive the field equations, not the idiotic heuristics of Einstein. Even E = mc2 was derived in the mid 1800s (well before Einstein ever stole anything).

Adding Marić’s contribution…
Nikola Tesla regarded Relativity as the greatest historical aberration of scientific thought. Relativity is no more than a philosophical standpoint, a virus to infect a “New Age”. From the standpoint of the electrical engineer Einstein’s Relativity is “Bravo-Sierra”! However, it has sunk its roots into the basic consideration of Inductance and Capacitance. L and C represent co-efficients of aetheric processes, and as such represent the aether, not Relativity. Albert Einstein stands in the way of Michael Faraday, and Pharisees are now Physicists (— Eric Dollard).



One thought on “Einstein was a fraud

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s