Sundry sources e.g.Nexus Mag, state openly Einstein was a plagiarist - what is concensus of opinion?

Answer 1

He would be by today's standards.

But Nexus is not the best source from which to obtain information.

"The secret to creativity is knowing how to hide your sources."
A. Einstein


It is true that Einstein rarely acknowledged prior work done by others. I have copies of many of his papers and have noted this for myself. I am well versed in relativity theory and physics in general and currently designing a web program to solve numerical relativity problems.

I can say that most of the information published by Nexus is verifiable, but they presented it in a rather unkind way.

In today's peer reviewed physics journals, many of his papers would not pass muster because he doesn't give sufficient references and citations to others from which he borrowed. This is a very big thing in science journals today.

For example, the equation he's most famous for [E=mc²] was published by two other people prior to him. The equation was first derived, defined and published 4 years prior to Einstein's birth, in the physics journal Physics of the Ether, by Samuel Tolver Preston, published in London in 1875 (first published in Italian). Some major universities still have copies of it stashed away.

Another person, Olinto De Pretto, published the same equation in 1903, two years before Einstein published his paper.

Both times, the equation was published in Italian first and Einstein was fluent in Italian and lived in Italy for some time. So, it is certainly possible he could have read those works. But that is mere speculation and no one can say for sure.

To his credit, Einstein took the equation to a higher level of interpretation and proposed the first experiment to put it to the test (by nuclear decay). After the equation was verified experimentally, only he was connected to the equation and all the previous authors who published it first were all but forgotten in the glare of his celebrity.

Unlike most physicists, Einstein was well connected to very influential people in high places. That had more influence than any of his actual work until after his death in 1955.

I would have more respect for his work if he at least gave more credit to his predecessors.

Believe it or not, Einstein's work does not lead to that equation. Knowledge outside the body of his own personal work led to it. The thought experiment he implied led to it is flawed for reasons too complex to outline here, but suffice it to say, he was right, but for the wrong reason - but nobody knew that till many years later and the concept was reexamined more closely.

The equation of time dilation and even the term "relativity" was used before he even published his first paper or became associated with the term himself.

Henri Poincaré published an article in the journal Science & Method in 1897 called 'The Relativity of Space'.

Consider these sources:
http://itis.volta.alessandria.it/episteme/ep6/ep6-bjerk1.htm
http://www.italiansrus.com/articles/emc2.htm
http://www.mathpages.com/rr/s8-08/8-08.htm
http://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/philosophy/works/fr/poincare.htm
http://www-cosmosaf.iap.fr/Poincare-RR3A.htm

Many people don't do sufficient research on relativity and what led up to it to know the full story.

I won't directly call Einstein a plagiarist, but he has received more credit that he was due in some cases. In any event, it is a firmly documented historic fact that he did NOT originate and was not the first to derive nor interpret the equation he is most famous for.

Nevertheless, his few original contributions to physics are important and their value undiminished.

Answer 2

Hi domteal

This - as you suggest - a fairly common criticism levelled at Einstein, particularly from sources who understand little of his work. In these days of mass information access I think the most important skill a curious person must cultivate is the ability to critically analyse their sources before accepting what they see/hear/read. By asking about what you've read in Nexus you're taking a good step in that direction. :o)

In my opinion Nexus magazine is a poor, disreputable source. It is also my considered opinion that Einstein was not a plagiarist.

Most of the theories I've seen about Einstein's "plagiarism" focus on his building upon or incorporation of the ideas of others into the foundations or details of his work. It's the expectation that Einstein worked in isolation which is the real mistake. For example there are a great many scientists who contributed in some way to the general theory of relativity (heaviside, levi-civita, ricci, then later schwarzschild, oppenheimer, kerr, feynman, wheeler, thorne, etc), but it was Einstein's key conceptual framework which drew it into a consistent, coherent theory. After conceiving the conceptual framework for GR he had to go away and get someone to help him come up with the appropriate maths for it. Same with special relativity (although it clearly includes lorentz and fitzgerald transforms, and later minkowski's space-time framework). You'll see a lot of rambling suggestions that someone or other published this equation or that equation (especially "e=mc^2") before Einstein, which usually demonstrates that the person doing the suggestion doesn't really understand the theory they're discussing.

However, importantly, do not take my word for it (my strength is relativistic physics, not physics history) - and don't take the word of anyone else who posts here (who may not have a related strength at all). Go check out some more reputable sources for yourself, online and at your library (yes, books are still useful! :o) ). Find some proper biographies. Good luck!


Hope this helps!
The Chicken