Customer Reviews

The Unexpected Einstein: The Real Man Behind the Icon

5 star:		(0)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

While Brian presents a broader picture of Einstein than many recent portrayals, and dispels a number of myths, I would have liked to have seen him dealing in greater depth on some topics. For instance, he doesn't articulate the central bases on which the most serious allegations of plagiarism rest, thereby somewhat trivialising the subject. This means that he fails to provide rebuttals of the allegations, which have superficial plausibility for people without the background knowledge to appreciate what is at issue. For instance, in relation to special relativity everyone knows that the Lorentz-Fitzgerald equation antedates Einstein's 1905 paper, but the significance of the latter is that the equation was derived on an entirely different fundamental basis, one which was to lead to a revolution in the understanding of space-time. Similarly, the fact that the equation E=mc2 had appeared in the literature earlier does not have the significance that some have ascribed to it. What matters is that Einstein showed it was a natural derivation from his newly developed conceptions.

Within a few months of the publication of the 1905 special relativity paper, the eminent theoretical physicist Max Planck gave a lecture on it in Berlin. Planck appreciated its significance immediately, and as an editor of Annalen der Physik he would have been familiar with the relevant literature on the subject. Had the paper been the work of a plagiarist, Planck could hardly have failed to have recognized the fact. The same applies to Wilhelm Wien who immediately arranged a colloquium on Einstein's paper, and for numerous physicists in the next couple of years such as Max Born, all of whom were thoroughly knowledgeable about the subject matter and the relevant literature.

It is unfortunate that readers of the claims about Einstein's alleged plagiarism have insufficient knowledge of the subject matter, and of its history, to appreciate that the superficially plausible allegations do not withstand critical analysis. It is a weakness of Brian's chapter on the subject that he failed to deal adequately with the substance of the allegations.

The book is on the defense to all myths, lies, and misunderstandings to the electric and complex yet down to earth and often simple figure Albert Einstein: Was he dyslexic? A womanizer? A terrible father? Did he believe in God? And was he a plagerizer? He also examines what Einstein was like face to face by using quotes by many people who knew or met him.

The author answers these questions honestly and reveals a man full of good humor, contradictions, and unexpected personality.

If you're looking for a fair and honest evaluation of Albert Einstein, avoid this book, unless you are one of those people elevating Albert to a cult figure status...

This book's intention is to defend Albert Einstein at all costs. Yes, he invented relativity, but there's clear evidence that his theories were built upon the previous work others - many of whom respected scientists that had well documented their discoveries years before Einstein's discoveries. But this author rudely shoves them away in a manner that seems almost angry in it's defense.

For exmaple, few laypeople know that the famous E = mc˛ (which Einstein never derived) was published by the Italian Olinto De Pretto in 1904. This has already been proven and is well documented. However, according to this author, if you believe this then you are are believing "anti-Semites" and "Neo-Nazis" thinking. What do you think this author is trying to make you feel with that statement?

Really, fair and honest this ain't. The written style makes me think of my first high school English report; it could never pass as a high school science report because this book is scarce in referencing supporting documentation.

I'm sure there are good books on there that honestly look at what came before Einstein and who he allowed to influence his work. But this book is clearly too angry to be one of them.