![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
I hope this doesn’t trigger yet another round of fruitless discussion, but… How do other people feel about changing “ German-born” to “ German-Jewish-born”? Such a change would satisfy my concern that the first sentence be brief and defensible against additions of other labels such as Swiss and American. I previously proposed something similar, but Geeman objected for reasons I do not understand. Perhaps this is something we can agree on. -- teb728 21:17, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
Which way? (and I fixed my last comment here-please read it a gain...:-)--
Gilisa 07:29, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Epson291 , forgot about my last comment (which is now striked) I think that we better live the status quo as it is .It get to my knowledge that this is the best way to obtein Einstein Jewishness along with his German history in a very balanced way , not ideal , but there is nothing better for now.--
Gilisa
07:48, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Surprised it's such a source of contention. Is the contention to do with hostility to him being acknowledged publicly as Jewish for some strange reason or it being a prominent feature? Note for example Brittanica which mentions it ("Einstein's parents were secular, middle-class Jews") within the first two paragraphs. [1] LiberalViews 23:07, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
Why is there no mention of the fact the the FBI kept a 1,427 page document of einstein's affiliation with 34 communist fronts and service as an honorary chairman for three communist organizations? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 64.81.227.133 ( talk) 05:43, 10 May 2007 (UTC).
Einstein was, however, a self avowed radical and a socialist. He helped found the influential socialist journal Monthly Review, and wrote an [[[article]]] for the first issue in 1949 called "why socialism?". I find it appalling that the Wiki article about Einstein remarks heavily about his Zionism but says virtually nothing whatsoever about his socialist convictions. Besides at least HAVING A LINK TO THE ARTICLE HE WROTE, there are other sources and means of characterizing his politics that have not been explored. For instance, Monthly Review ran an article on Einstein's politics in the May 2005 issue entitled, "Albert Einstein, Radical" by John J. Simon. The red-baiting intentions of the poster of this comment aside, we should conclude that the omission of the radical left-wing nature of Einstein's politics is not only egregious, but likely intentional.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.53.11.40 ( talk • contribs) 17:39, 28 May 2007.
The template says partial protection, but it seems to be full. -- Allen 04:03, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
“I should much rather see reasonable agreement with the Arabs on the basis of living together in peace than the creation of a Jewish state. Apart from practical consideration, my awareness of the essential nature of Judaism resists the idea of a Jewish state with borders, an army, and a measure of temporal power, no matter how modest. I am afraid of the inner damage Judaism will sustain - especially from the development of a narrow nationalism within our own ranks, against which we have already had to fight strongly, even without a Jewish state.” – Albert Einstein
http://globalwebpost.com/farooqm/writings/other/einstein.htm
Einstein is often portrayed as a Zionist and a supporter of the Jewish state. I believe that it would be important to demonstrate that he had serious reservations about the establishment of a Jewish state. Einstein's quotes deserve to be posted in their entirety. Only posting a portion of a quotation does not do him justice and often serves to misrepresent his positions.
Sunspot123 05:37, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
there is talk that einstien had aspergers syndrome (autism in a person with extremaly superior brain functioning) should we mention this, note: people with dissabilitys are not stupid, the fact einstien was a genius dose not mean he did not have a disability, genius is actually a symptom of aspergers, among other things ofcourse —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 172.206.77.234 ( talk) 15:17:23, August 19, 2007 (UTC)
ofcourse its too late to actualy properly diagnose him but we do know he had some form of of disability, probably aspergers but it may be ADHD or dyslexia, we should atleast mentuion that he had a disability but were unsure on witch one —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 172.206.77.234 ( talk) 20:13, August 20, 2007 (UTC)
yes i agree that aspergers isent really a disability if thats what you mean —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.213.88.85 ( talk) 19:30, August 28, 2007 (UTC)
to the above he did have friends but he had friends who had leanrned to accept his social misunderstanding, just because your autistc dosent mean you dont get friends —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.201.197.61 ( talk • contribs) 10:15, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
Research has been carried by Simon Baron-Cohen and others into the possibility that Einstein, and others such as Isaac Newton, had AS or even HFA. They have concluded that Einstein probably had HFA, due to the delay in language acquisition during his childhood. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 143.117.23.221 ( talk) 12:16, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
This article is very well written, and appears to be very complete and informative. It's a pretty good and accurate description of Einstein's life. A good, thorough copyedit would be good, as there are still a couple errors in the prose, mainly things like some structural grammar and punctuation issues (commas not being there when they should, etc).
The main issue holding this article up from GA status at the present time is references. There's still a lot of unsourced information, primarily earlier in the article, but a couple later on. There's some pretty bold statements that lack references as well. Examples:
The other major issue with the references is that both Harvard references and inline citations are used in the article, and there doesn't seem to be any pattern over the types of information that either are used on -- it's pretty haphazard. While WP:CITE doesn't really say which citation format you should use (it talks about both, and lets editors decide), it doesn't look very professional to use both in the same document. Although I can see a justification for citing books written by Einstein himself using the Harvard method, and everything else using inline citations, since this would also produce a nice list of his own books and publications at the end of the article, while still leaving most of the other citations in the other footnote format.
Overall, I think the article is very close to GA status, so I will put this on hold until October 9, 2007 (or sooner, if you can fix the issues). Cheers! Dr. Cash 05:21, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
I believe this article now meets the Good Article criteria, and will be listed. Good work! Dr. Cash 01:46, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
Can someone please add an important quote to Einstiens article? It is "We cannot fix our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them" Thanks!!! Dustihowe 16:10, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
I heard a story about how Albert Einstein's last words are unknown because he told them to a nurse who didn't speak German. Shouldn't this be on here?
“ | Last week Professor Einstein trudged no more in the grounds of his beloved institute. A lingering gall-bladder infection sent him to the hospital. Blood began to escape from his aorta, the main artery. Shortly after midnight he muttered a few sentences in German. The night nurse could not understand, and the last words of the modern world's greatest scientist were lost. At 1:15 a.m. Albert Einstein, 76, died in his sleep. | ” |
I added the IPA for Einstein in English (check if correct). His being German/Swiss would account for the German (and native) pronunciation. Since he became an American citizen however, and lived in the United States the rest of his life, it's only fair to include the English pronunciation of his name, otherwise it would appear to the reader only the German way to say it, is proper, when the truth is, no one speaking English would say, "shtein" instead of "stein" when speaking German names. Epson291 08:10, 11 October 2007 (UTC)it
Since you two clearly don't agree on pronunciation, let me ask again: Why does this article need any pronunciation?! -- teb728 22:41, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
Why isn't the Nobel Prize icon next to his name? MLK, Elie Wiesel, and Al Gore all have it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.255.141.51 ( talk) 19:31, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
Of the three paragraphs below which were in the ‘Religious views’ section, user DAGwyn ( talk · contribs), with "Removed advertisements for causes with minor or nonexistent connections to Einstein" in the edit summary, removed the first two entirely and removed the second sentence from the third paragraph:
(1) Einstein championed the work of psychologist Paul Diel, [1] which posited a biological and psychological, rather than theological or sociological, basis for morality. [2]
(2) Einstein was an Honorary Associate of the Rationalist Press Association beginning in 1934, and was an admirer of Ethical Culture. [3] He served on the advisory board of the First Humanist Society of New York [4] [5]
(3) His friend Max Jammer explored Einstein's views on religion thoroughly in the 1999 book Einstein and Religion: Physics and Theology. [6] Corey S. Powell, [7] in the 2002 book God in the Equation: How Einstein Became the Prophet of the New Religious Era, considers Einstein the founder of what Powell, the executive editor of Discover magazine, calls sci/religion. [8]
In the next edit, the same user, with "EB online article has less information than we do, and contains errors which their editors refused to correct" in the edit summary, removed the {{ Britannica}} template. Perhaps it should be restored (see what links to it), I don't know.
I will leave the Paul Diehl, Rationalist Press Association, Ethical Culture, or Humanist Society material and citations to others, because I'm not equipped to evaluate them. The Powell book is not an “advertisement” for anything. I restored the line, simplifying its citation. — Athaenara ✉ 08:04, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
Epson291 changed the German and English pronunciations from [ˈalbɐt ˈaɪ̯nʃtaɪ̯n] and /ˈælbɝt ˈaɪnstaɪn/ respectively to [ˈalbɐt ˈaɪ̯nʃtaɪ̯n] and [ˈælbɝt ˈaɪnstaɪn] with the summary “Confused, one IPA had slashes, the other brackets, changed the second IPA to square brackets.” I know that for most people there is no difference. But if we are to use only slashes or only brackets, it should be slashes. In case you are interested, brackets indicate an exact phonetic pronunciation. Slashes indicate a phonemic pronunciation, where the exact pronunciation depends on the dialect. In particular, the exact pronunciation of /ɝ/ depends on whether one speaks a rhotic dialect. -- teb728 t c 07:15, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
and a poll of prominent physicists named him the greatest physicist of all time.[4] The reference links to a BBC web site which refers to an article in Physics World, instead link directly to the article published in Physics World, apart from being the original source it's far more interesting. The link is: http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/print/851 Jellycats ( talk) 23:44, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
I've been trying to find out exactly what the nature was of Einstein's formal education beyond secondary school. The WP entry merely says "Einstein graduated in 1900 from ETH with a degree in physics." The entry's source footnote links to a biographical site which states is no more helpful: he "...enrolled at the Swiss Federal Polytechnic School in Zurich. Albert graduated in 1900 with a degree in physics." I don't know about anyone else here, but the term "degree" doesn't satisfy my curiosity. What kind of degree? -Associate? -Ph.D? Surely we can do better than that! Does anyone have any reliable info about what level of a degree it was, and if there was a field of study more specific than just "physics"? Bricology ( talk) 02:01, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
Does anyone else have a problem hearing his entire name on the audio file at the very benginning of the article? I propose we take it off until a better one is found. 128.194.21.91 ( talk) 21:11, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
Albert Einstein was not an excellent student in elementary school. He was a failure/underachiever in all subjects excluding mathematics and science. His parents suspected him of the problem of having mental retardation because of it. I propose that this mistake be fixed before someone else receives the wrong information. 69.231.129.91 ( talk) 20:15, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
The German translation of the English sentences are: "Diese Suppe ist zu heiß!", "So, Du kannst sprechen. Warum hast Du bis heute nichts gesagt?", "Bis jetzt ist alles in Ordnung gewesen." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.176.201.66 ( talk) 21:57, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
The only US museum dedicated to Albert Einstein is at Landau, a family run retail store that sells fine woolens. There have been proposals to have the State of New Jersey build a museum to Einstein; so far the State has declined to do so. Further information about the Landau Museum is available here: http://www.landauprinceton.com/einstein-museum/ 17:44, 18 January 2008 (UTC)John Rydberg
why dont u have that famous picture of him with his tongue out? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.155.201.195 ( talk) 20:51, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
It would be good to add some info on his sense of humor or a few quotes. Anyone know any sources?-- DatDoo ( talk) 03:54, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
I removed the following problematic paragraph:
If the marriage was beset by financial worries, there should be a citation. In any case contrary to the implication, such worries probably were not the cause of the divorce. Hans was the engineer, and Eduard the schizophrenic. Contrary to the implication, Albert and Elsa moved to Princeton many years after their marriage.
This:
is not supported by the source provided:
I have just read the chapter "Moonlighting in the Patent Office" (thanks, Google Books), and I haven't found the words "waste of Einstein's talents" nor anything equivalent. The word "moonlighting" is not necessarily a negative word implying the waste of someone's talents, this may also be a positive word (see e.g. [3] [4]). The word should not be interpreted in a biased manner. (-- Edcolins ( talk) 17:26, 5 February 2008 (UTC))
Besides, when first looking at the cover page of the book "The Complete Idiot's Guide to Understanding Einstein", with much respect to the author of the book, this is not exactly the kind of book I would consider to be a reference book on the subject. That is, I wouldn't cite the source. What do you think? --
Edcolins (
talk)
17:26, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
The discussion below involves the proposed integration (not necessary sequentially) of the following two aspects of Einstein's religious views:
I believe that Einstein's view on Jesus is important to include because it provides important context to his statements about not believing in a personal god. I believe that Einstein's view on the church is important because it shows that his views changed dramatically throughout his life - something that isn't otherwise captured in the Wikipedia article.
The section does seem to be a bit long. I noticed that his views on a personal god are repeated in two paragraphs. Perhaps they could be pared down. -- Ed Brey ( talk) 01:50, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
(unindent) I would also like to add, with the possibility of starting a new discussion on this topic in the near future, that the religious views section was repeatedly mentioned during the Featured article review, in which the article was delisted. The reviewers implored the editors to use fewer quotes in the section, and so trim the text down as well, calling the current section "amateurish" and criticizing its exclusive reliance on "dueling quotes." I also happen to believe that the section would benefit, not from more quotes, but from fewer quotes, summarizing the main points where appropriate. Silly rabbit ( talk) 14:28, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
(unindent) I agree with your concerns about primary sources in general. But do they apply to this case? Specifically, can you quote the debatable conclusions for me? Given the length and depth of Einstein's remarks, how likely would you say it is that he was just being agreeable? If the acceptance standard for primary sources were so high to throw these out, it would seem that one would have to throw out nearly all primary sources for any article. As to relevance, I understand your point given the size of the section, which can be addressed by refactoring the section to move the sources externally. -- Ed Brey ( talk) 12:08, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
I agree that the quotations make up too much of the section. I would favor moving most, if not all, quotes over to wikiquote, which would leave lots of room to capture the aspects of his religious views that have been brought up so far in a tidy-sized section. Thoughts on that? -- Ed Brey ( talk) 23:33, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
Shouldn't we have a daughter article on this subject? We have one for Charles Darwin's views on religion, and Einstein is of similar notability, both in general and for his religious views. There also seems to be a whole book on the subject (Einstein and Religion : Physics and Theology by Max Jammer, also used as a reference at one point). If someone can write an almost 300 page book on this topic surely we can write an article on it. Richard001 ( talk) 00:18, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Aren't these contradictory labels? Socialism (as preached by all socialists except the libertarian socialists) requires the use of force which contradicts the tenets of pacifism. afr3 ( talk) 07:54, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
I've read numerous times in biographies and scientific books that Einstein was at one point offered to become President of Israel shortly after it was created, but he turned the offer down..
Is this true? I see no mention of it in the article...
Gamer112 ( talk) 07:36, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
Albert Einstein's father died in 1902, shortly after giving his permission for his son to marry Mileva, and not in 1910, before the birth of his second grandson. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.59.61.49 ( talk) 01:09, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
Can anyone direct me to a resource that indicates which languages Einstein was fluent in? I'm guessing German and English, doubtfully Yiddish...but any others? As a pioneer in a rapidly developing area, I expect he'd want to keep up with breakthroughs in the journals of his era. I've found it a curiously difficult thing to research for any historical figure, at least in terms of generating a complete list. Asat ( talk) 13:51, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
write in English. Einstein said that he preferred to write in German. He said that he could remember the English words all right, but could not cope with the treacherous spelling. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.138.211.50 ( talk) 09:35, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
It would be cool if putting in Nick The Greek's reported nickname for Einstein redirected to this page. 69.108.24.80 ( talk) 16:40, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
"What are you talking about" is my exact question to you. It's pretty easy to find out what I'm talking about. The Nick the Greek/Einstein story is well-known, and if you don't just google it. 68.123.158.127 ( talk) 16:38, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
Einstein was a Zionist and supporter of Chaim Weizmann and Theodore Herzl, but the article so far has much more of his criticism of the far right in Israel/the Yishuv. Consequently, it looks like he was far more critical of Israel and its founding than he actually was. I am a new editor on Wikipedia, so I am hesitant to be aggressive on this issue - I have to date made only minor modifications pending further talk and consideration. - Jameseavesjo
I thought the information on the wiki page 'Albert Einstein' was born into a jewish family, there is a greater chance of him being jewish. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Superman417 ( talk • contribs) 01:06, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
Citizenship in Switzerland is by canton, rather than nation-wide. Perhaps this should be made clear in Einstein's biography. -- Wloveral ( talk) 21:48, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
I don't know if anybody ever looked at what a complicated citizenship life Einstein had. From the Wiki article on Einstein, section "Youth and Schooling" it says.
So from 1896 he was a stateless person (refugee?) living in Switzerland in the Canton of Aargau. Was renouncing German or Württemberg citizenship that easy for a 17 year old -- even with his father's approval in 1896?
And in February 1901 he received Swiss citizenship in the Canton of Zürich.
The site: [5] which is given as reference number 13 above further states:
On site [6], listed as reference number 14 above, it indicates that he renounced his German or Württemberg citizenship on January 28, 1896 so he was stateless for over five years.
The same site appears to indicate that he took Austrian (Austro-Hungarian?) citizenship in 1911 as part of a University posting in Prague, Bohemia. It also indicates that Einstein regained German citizenship in April 1914 , before the start of WW 1, as a result of his entering the German (Prussian?) civil service as a member of the Prussian Academy of Sciences and professor at the University of Berlin. Loosing it in March 1932 when he left Germany. Were the Austrian and the second German citizenships job related documents?
From 1932 to 1940 he only held Swiss citizenship. And in 1940 he received U.S. citizenship.
Does anyone else think that just the various citizenships that he held was complicated? I won't even start on his two marriages. The first one was quite complicated.-- TGC55 ( talk) 01:38, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
Whats the reason? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 219.73.1.127 ( talk) 04:50, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
he was maried two a women and they had two sons then they had a divorce and then he got married to his COUSIN —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.45.70.134 ( talk) 21:34, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
There is vandalism on the main page. I would love to edit it but the article is locked. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 158.125.189.206 ( talk) 13:16, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
I've changed the Jewish ethnicity to Semitic. Whether "Jewish" is an ethnicity or not is debatable, and Hebrew/Semitic is a more correct term. Intranetusa 04:15, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
Judaism is not an ethnicity- it is a religious faith. To say that Judaism is an ethnicity is falling into the trap that the Nazis did- a Jew is a Jew by religious choice- saying that it is an ethnicity negates any conversions that take place in or out of the faith which is absurd. I can't believe that wikipedia allows this to stand. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dbmerge ( talk • contribs) 01:01, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
Shalom, everyone! I lived in Israel for six month, took a class on Jewish ethnic minorities at Haifa University, and as an aspiring cultural anthropologist, and now currently take five anthropology classes including one on Ethnicity, I have great news for you all! Yes, wait for it... Jewish-ness is, in fact, an ethnicity. I really don't know what you people are rambling about... frankly, don't have time to read through all these silly ideas you people have. Jewish ethnicity is complicated, but it's a fact. It exists. End of story. Learned to live with it, love it. Oh, and unless I've been misinformed all of my life, Einstein is a Jew. I'm a big fan of his: a bobble-head and a portrait to prove it. But here's the kicker, to answer the none-sense about how Jewish ethnicity is Nazi propaganda! If you convert to Orthodox Judaism, you become ethnically Jewish. It's magical and bizarre, I know, but that's how it works. Philolexica ( talk) 14:28, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
Another editor added "Religion = Judaism" to the infobox, which I reverted because in previous reading here I'd seen discussion where the conclusion 'seemed' to be "this is far from obvious, not simple, and even applying a tag would be misleading".
I've a question I'd like to ask, as I've not seen such a thing elsewhere, even on articles with years-long arguments on fine points, that were 'finally' resolved to one consensus or another. Would it be useful to have a small section above that gives a short summary list of difficult/contentious issues and their consensus outcome? Something like:
I thought something like this would be a great thing to ask a new editor to look at, after reverting their reflex change of a 'difficult' item 'obvious' to them, like, uh, I just did. :-( Has anyone here seen anything like this done on other articles? Shenme ( talk) 22:34, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi all,
I'm about to nominate List of scientific publications of Albert Einstein as a Featured List candidate, but I'd welcome your suggestions before I do. As you might notice, it's been a ton of work, so please be gentle in your criticisms; thank you! :) Willow ( talk) 12:16, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
In the section on religious views the following quote is found:
"In view of such harmony in the cosmos which I, with my limited human mind, am able to recognize, there are yet people who say there is no God. But what really makes me angry is that they quote me for the support of such views."
Most of the quotes in this section are first-hand, direct quotes from Einstein's writings. But the source of this quote says "Albert Einstein, according to the testimony of Prince Hubertus of Lowenstein; as quoted by Ronald W. Clark, Einstein: The Life and Times, New York: World Publishing Company, 1971, p. 425."
It's important to distinguish it from the first-hand quotes in the article. It's filtered through the memories and prejudices of two people. Pol098 ( talk) 12:52, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
Dear TEB728, why did you consider the link to Bloomsbury Auctions as a "spam"? The website (the original link to which was not due to me, although I was responsible for changing it from a loose link into a cited reference) shows the actual letter, which I consider as very valuable — it shows that the letter is hand-written and includes many corrections; one normally assumes that Einstein must have let the letter be typed by his secretary. Given the fact that the letter is likely to disappear in a private collection, I propose to restore the link to Bloomsbury Auctions. Kind regards, --BF 02:20, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
(outdent) BF, Please read WP:AGF. I am acting in good faith, and I assume you also are acting in good faith. I fail to see, however, the reason for your fantasizing my motives:
Let me add to what I said in my first two posts: I looked again at the Bloomsbury Auctions scans and their quality is pretty bad. It seems to me that this low quality makes them of little value either as a specimen of Einstein’s handwriting or as a source for original research. — teb728 t c 08:48, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
OK, I'll give this a shot, even though requests posted on Wikipedia:Third opinion should reference disputes involving no more than two editors, and I see more than two here. In my opinion:
In any third opinion dispute between two parties, the third opinion giver has to choose sides. I'm sorry but while I agree that BF and teb have been acting in good faith, and that both have eloquently stated their positions, I have to say that I would have probably reverted BF's contribution myself if I had seen it first. ~ Amatulić ( talk) 21:49, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
BF: I didn't see "so much opposition" - only opposition by one person in particular. I have no doubt that the letter is valuable to include in the article, but the way you included it, by linking to a temporary page, wasn't workable. That, and the fact that your accompanying description could be considered somewhat spammy, are why I said I would have deleted the link. If you can find another reproduction of it, please do include it. It would be a shame if something like that were lost. I have not said that readers wouldn't be interested in such a thing; in fact I disagree with that sentiment. This is an encyclopedia after all; its function is to be, well, encyclopedic.
To TEB: I'll address the points discussed on 19 May:
Those are my views. Hope it helps. ~ Amatulić ( talk) 23:42, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
Amatulić’s reply to BF’s 20 May post clarifies the issue for me in a way that suggests a compromise. The issue is inclusionism:
The fact that Wikipedia is a web encyclopedia has three important consequences: On the one hand, it means that virtually anything could be added to the encyclopedia. After all, it’s just gigabytes; it doesn’t cost any trees. On the other hand, it creates a practical limit on the size of articles, as discussed in WP:SIZE. In compensation for that limit, however, it encourages sub-articles; for an interested reader, a sub-article is only a click away.
The Albert Einstein article is now 83 KB long—rather over the recommended size. I don’t usually think about it this way, but I guess this fact is the main reason I resist adding relatively unimportant content to the article. Several major sections already have been split out into sub-articles. If the same were done with the “Religious view” section, the sub-article would have dozens of kilobytes available for the kind of details BF wants to add. And I would have no problem with adding them there.
As for the Bloomsbury Auctions link, the page is still there, but requires a free registration for access. I am not sure whether that sort of thing is appropriate for Wikipedia. If it is, I would have no problem with linking it from a sub-article. (The letter was estimated to sell for £8000 but sold for £170000. Wow!)
As for the Randerson article, I agree with BF that it is well written. But although it was written in reaction to the Gutkind letter, it is not a particularly good reference for the letter. Rather it seems to me its importance is as an overview of Einstein’s religious views. I think it would be an appropriate external reference in a sub-article. — teb728 t c 00:53, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
Can someone clarify what is a "Middlesex heir"? Is it someone from Middlesex County (not, I dare say, the county of Middlesex) who was heir to something? Or was there someone called Middlesex who had heirs? Myrvin ( talk) 12:47, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
The list of scientific publications by Albert Einstein is a Featured List candidate. If you care at all about Albert Einstein articles on Wikipedia, please review the list and either support it or oppose it at its candidacy. Thank you! Willow ( talk) 18:52, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
It somewhat bothers me that the change to refer to the list of scientific publications has lost the non-scientific publications. Perhaps the original "Works" article ought to be restored. — DAGwyn ( talk) 18:50, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
The way that section was written seems to conflate Judaism and Zionism, and implies Einstein's cultural and religious background automatically associated him with the actions of Israel's government, despite the fact that his philosophy and writing imply otherwise. Perhaps that section should be renamed "Einstein's relationship to/philosophy on the state of Israel". Absolute Relativity ( talk) 03:55, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
"In a 1954 letter, Einstein rejected the idea that the Jews are God's chosen people." Okay, this is very interesting, but shouldn't this be in the religious views section, not the politics section? Whyzeee ( talk) 08:46, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
1) If you want to claim that Einstein opposed political Zionism please include a source.
2) Why did you delete the phrase "Despite his years of Zionist efforts..."? Are you denying that Einstein ever made any Zionist efforts? Whyzeee ( talk) 09:22, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
Why isn't there any mention of Einstein and his Russian lover Margarita Konenkova here? It turns out that she was a KGB spy, but alas, Einstein probably did not know it 71.103.0.107 ( talk) 04:25, 30 May 2008 (UTC)Serkan.
It seems odd that under the "influences" section there is only one mention. At the very least I think the following should be added:
Baruch Spinoza Immanuel Kant Ernst Mach
I imagine there are others but these three, at the very least, strike me as some that should be mentioned.
Somrh ( talk) 06:58, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
In the Collaboration and conflict section, there is a link to determinism in the sentence
Einstein's disagreement with Bohr revolved around the idea of scientific determinism
. This needs to be changed to a link to Scientific determinism, which is pointedly different than the philosophical question of determinism that is currently shown. 75.151.79.169 ( talk) 20:53, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
A physicist in Prague, Ludek Zakel, claims to be the son of Albert Einstein and his second wife, Elsa, given at birth in a Prague hospital to Mrs. Zakel, whose own son, born at the same time, had died. (Zakel himself has no web presence that I can find, so I conclude he was not, himself, a notable person.) Stories about Zakel and his claims have been published the NYT http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=990CE4DC1F3AF931A15754C0A963958260 and in TIME magazine, although that was a long time ago, and I found no TIME article on the internet. The story presented in the NYT article is believable, and so I think that reporting this claim is appropriate on this page. What do others think about this? (Please read the article before deciding.) Vegasprof ( talk) 20:56, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
this article is way to long! shorten it to seperate articles-- Nick54321blastoff ( talk) 05:03, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
hi,
he's been nominated 50 times before receiving the prize. [8] i think this is quite an interesting info.
216.80.119.92 ( talk) 20:14, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
"The word god is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation no matter how subtle can (for me) change this".
In light of the above newly available quote, are we now justified in identifying Einstein as an atheist? Nick Graves ( talk) 02:22, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
I think Einstein left this point on religion clearly stated, there are plenty of references on this, however the discussion is very interesting,indeed, please do not stop. Missingdata1 ( talk) 15:03, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
"I received your letter of June 10th. I have never talked to a Jesuit priest in my life and I am astonished by the audacity to tell such lies about me. From the viewpoint of a Jesuit priest I am, of course, and have always been an atheist. - Albert Einstein, letter to Guy H. Raner Jr, July 2, 1945,"
Greg Locock ( talk) 11:24, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
Einstein's position on theism seemed to change throughout his life. As we seem to be dealing with quotations (for some reason or another), he started of with the infamous quote;
"I want to know how God created this world. I am not interested in this or that phenomenon, in the spectrum of this or that element. I want to know His thoughts; the rest are details."
And seemed to end on this:
"I'm not an atheist. The human mind is not capable of grasping the Universe. We are like a little child entering a huge library. The walls are covered to the ceilings with books in many different tongues. The child knows that someone must have written these books. It does not know who or how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. But the child notes a definite plan in the arrangement of the books---a mysterious order which it does not comprehend, but only dimly suspects."
From what I can asertain, Einstein seemed to be at points either a psuedo-pantheist or quasi-agnostic. The question of God is an open one for Einstein, he was neither this or that, but had a quite respect for the "mysterious order" that "governs the universe". —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
84.70.26.240 (
talk)
17:06, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
Humanist seems to the best description for him Absolute Relativity ( talk) 03:55, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
That's a stretch. Wikifan12345 ( talk) 23:32, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
I would have to agree with the unsigned user that "pantheist" would probably be the most appropriate label if any were appropriate. Einstein was heavily influenced by Baruch Spinoza and made reference to this fact (including reference to god). What we get from Spinoza is a god is not "supernatural" or outside the universe creating the universe or a "personal god" concerned with the affairs of human beings but rather we get a "naturalized" god who was equated with nature. Much of Einstein's comments about "god" can be interpreted as that overall deterministic order to the universe of which Einstein and other scientists were attempting to uncover. Somrh ( talk) 06:51, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
Einstein was quoted as saying that he was not an atheist and did not think he was a pantheist. By what I have read, I think that he was a deist. -- UberScienceNerd Talk Contributions 21:22, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
so with all these conflicting reports, why label him at all? its not like religious view-point changes the significance of his work. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.45.106.103 ( talk) 10:22, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
In regards to Einstein's religious views he was certainly not an atheist, many quotes from him can point to this conclusion. Does this 1954 letter that Wikipedia mentions but I have seen no reference to in other sources even exist? There seems to have been no follow up in proving that this letter was written by him. I would not refer to the letter as fact like the article does. Overall I would say this site
http://www.einsteinandreligion.com/ does the best job of covering Einstein's views. It is impossible to label the man but I would say the closest you could get is some sort of Deist. A man who seemed to believe that the laws of the universe originated from some higher power and were not just "there", but nothing beyond that.
24.177.251.86 (
talk)
06:05, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
You wouldn't know it from this article! 99.140.200.24 ( talk) 03:23, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
I have here a toy that my colleagues bought for my little daughter. The toy is made by the "Baby Einstein Company, LLC". Down the bottom of the packaging it says:
Surely not! Can anyone confirm? - Tbsdy lives ( talk) 06:05, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
There is a mistake in the second paragraph, in the following statement: "and his general theory of relativity, which extended the principle of relativity to non-uniform motion,". To show that this is a mistake, I quote from the popular General Relativity textbook entitled Spacetime and Geometry: An Introduction to General Relativity, by Sean M. Carrol. In section 1.2, p.11, he says: "The notion of acceleration in special relativity has a bad reputation, for no good reason...In particular, there is no truth to the rumor that SR is unable to deal with accelerated trajectories, and general relativity must be invoked. General relativity becomes relevant in the presence of gravity, when spacetime becomes curved."
I am not well enough versed in relativity to change the article. But would somebody else please correct this mistake? -- Singularitarian ( talk) 06:59, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
It's a famous picture, why isnt there something on it in wikipedia? there are reasons why this happened, you know. just google it and you'll see D e v r i t 03:26, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
Hello, I would like to add Princeton University Press' newly formed Einstein Page ( http://press.princeton.edu/einstein/) to list of external links. Thanks, Watson —Preceding unsigned comment added by Watsonwang26 ( talk • contribs) 15:37, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
Is it true that Einstein was member of German Democratic Party ??? (I heard that a lot but I haven't found any evidence) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.164.238.230 ( talk) 15:58, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
Could somebody please add an external link to Princeton University Press' newly established Einstein page.
http://press.princeton.edu/einstein/index.html
Thanks very much, Watson —Preceding unsigned comment added by Watsonwang26 ( talk • contribs) 17:49, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
John C. Huang ( talk) 02:14, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
Accoording to his article, Rabindranath Tagore is Bengali, not Indian as described in the caption beneath the picture with him and Einstein. 211.30.122.32 ( talk) 02:52, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
Ohanian, Hans C., Einstein's Mistakes: The Human Failings of Genius, W.W. Norton, 2008. Gwen Gale ( talk) 07:39, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
I don't understand the following sentences from the above section as they don't make much sense:
"Although he continued to be lauded for his work in theoretical physics, Einstein became increasingly isolated in his research, and his attempts were ultimately unsuccessful."
His attempts at what - formulating a unified field theory maybe?
"In his pursuit of a unification of the fundamental forces, he ignored some mainstream developments in physics (and vice versa), most notably the strong and weak nuclear forces, which were not well understood until many years after Einstein's death."
What does vice versa mean here - that he was ignored by some mainstream developments. First of all you can be ignored by a person but not by a development, and secondly, if his attempts were unsuccessful what was there to be ignored? Richerman ( talk) 00:29, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
I thought Einstien was very religious. I thought he also read the Bible five times. By the way, he was not Jewish. I'm agreeing with the article or whatever it was up top. P. S. I think you need to change it or "update it." Coralandstarr ( talk) 18:30, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
I have Asperger's syndrome, and taking that into account, we're pretty sure that Einstein had Asperger's as well. I know that Asperger people learn in different ways than normal people. From what I heard, I'm certain that Einstein failed arithmetic. And it seems to me that these sources written in the 2000s that say he was a top student in elementary school are done by leftists who want to rewrite history.
Let me note that it is commonly written that FDR was a great US President and that his New Deal got the US out of the Great Depression, all of which is very doubtful. We believe that hiring more people for jobs would better do the trick rather than more federal gov't intervention. We believe it was the entry into World War II that really ended the Depression.
Unless you guys have some really good reasoning why I shouldn't leave this "top student" part out, I don't think it should stay. Let's try three days, if there's no response to this, I will proceed to remove this sourced note. Marcus2 ( talk) 23:28, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
Einstein's illnesses in 1895 and 1919 seem to have been mental illnesses. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.158.207.21 ( talk) 11:46, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
On neither of the occasions mentioned did Einstein have a "nervous" illness. At the end of 1895 he obtained a medical certificate from an obliging doctor, the elder brother of his medical student friend Max Talmud, attesting he was suffering from "neurasthenic exhaustion", but this was merely a pretext to enable him to be granted permission to leave his Gymnasium in Munich and join his parents who had emigrated to Italy earlier that year (A. Fölsing, Albert Einstein (1997), p. 30). In 1917 he fell ill with a stomach ailment, later diagnosed as a duodenal ulcer, almost certainly precipitated by his failing to take sufficient care of himself since his marriage with Mileva broke down, and he lived alone while working intensely on General Relativity theory. He continued to experience stomach problems over the next two years, and was confined to bed for some weeks in 1918, but continued working on physics during this time (Fölsing, pp. 405-06; 417-18). Esterson ( talk) 20:03, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
Naturally this article needs to cover Einstein's religious views. However, should the infobox include "religious stance"? See the discussion on removing religion from the infobox for scientists. -- Johnuniq ( talk) 23:59, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
Einstein letter shows disdain for religion: Albert Einstein described belief in God as "childish superstition" and said Jews were not the chosen people, in a letter to be sold in London this week, an auctioneer said Tuesday.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/1951333/Einstein-thought-religions-were-'childish'.html http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2008/may/12/peopleinscience.religion http://blogs.nature.com/news/thegreatbeyond/2008/05/einstein_god_is_human_weakness_1.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by Babakmd ( talk • contribs) 14:25, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
Of course he was Jewish, whether he was religious in the conventional sense or not. On that general topic, I give you this story, from Groucho Marx: "I knew a fellow named Otto Kahn, who was a very rich man, and he gave a lot of money to the Metropolitan Opera House at one time. And his close friend was Marshall P. Wilder, who was a hunchback. And they were walking down Fifth Avenue, and they came to a synagogue, and Kahn turned to Wilder and he said 'Marshall, you know I used to be a Jew.' Marshall said 'Really? I used to be a hunchback.'" Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 14:29, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
Sounds racist to me.
This angle seems to be exaggerated in Wikipedia, especially in the biographies of great men. At the same time, while Einstein was for all intents and purposes not from anything any reasonable person would call a Jewish background, he was involved in early Zionist politics, and advocated some sort of ethnic identity - almost a nationalistic one. His life was also affected by racism in some ways - of course, that is a separate issue, and does not necessarily go together with anything else, though it does here. All of that can be treated in the relevant place within the biography, with whatever importance each of these things had in this or that period of his life. What we should avoid is tagging a man or claiming him for (the Hall of Fame of) a group, as opposed to describing him. In general, we should prefer descriptions - the more nuanced and adjusted to the subject of the biography, the better - to definitions, many of which are unencyclopaedic. Feketekave ( talk) 07:53, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
Quite a bit of time in the archives of this discussion page has already been spent discussing whether Einstein's status as an ethnic Jew should be mentioned in the infobox/lead/category/etc. Consensus at least emerged to have Jewish as in the relevant field of the infobox, based on (among reams of discussion) also a straw poll. Furthermore, the issue of whether Einstein should be characterized as German-born, American, Swiss, Swiss-American, Jewish, etc., in the lead has also been discussed, and the consensus to emerge from that discussion was simply to say "German-born", rather than to attempt to dissect his rather complicated nationality in the first sentence. His nation of birth is relevant in order to give context for the German pronunciation of his name. Accordingly, I have reverted one of Feketekave's edits (which also lacked an edit summary). I am considering whether to revert the rest of them. siℓℓy rabbit ( talk) 19:06, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
Per WP:BRD, the onus is one you, Feketekave, to develop consensus here rather than force your own version of the article against the previous consensus (here and abundantly discussed in the archives, which you so far have shown no sign of having read). I suggest that you start a WP:RFC rather than continuing an edit war here. If you do not come up with an agreeable phrasing for an RfC, then I will start one myself. Thanks, siℓℓy rabbit ( talk) 01:16, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
I hope we do not have an edit war here yet. I thank you for your references, and would rather you refrained from making assumptions on what I have and haven't read. See also WP:CIVIL. Please refrain from making blanket accusations of "exceptionally poor judgement" (which you have made more than once).
We seem to agree on some issues, one of them being - it seems - that this is a general topic that should be subject to a general discussion in a common place, rather than here. What would be the difference between bringing it up to RfC and bringing it up in the Village Pump? What would you think more appropriate/helpful, and why? Feketekave ( talk) 01:38, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
I am not, by the way, the same person as Babakmd above or Coralandstarr below; feel free to run a checkuser if that is what you are implying. Feketekave ( talk) —Preceding undated comment was added at 01:51, 16 January 2009 (UTC).
(To Feketekave) I agree with the assertion that categories are not binary, and I much prefer to err on the side of overcategorization than undercategorization, given that the stated purpose of categorization is to serve as a navigation aid rather than to be an absolute judgment of the article. That said, your rationale for excluding Einstein from these categories, and removing various references to his Jewish heritage from the text is that he is not Jewish enough. Above you say: "[Einstein was] not from anything any reasonable person would call a Jewish background." Well, the threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not "truth". Many reliable sources indicate that Einstein was Jewish: not religiously, but ethnically so. So both the requirements of WP:V, and what seems the weaker requirement of your reasonable person test would seem to be adequately met. Sources also show that his membership to the Jewish people significantly influenced details of his public life. Equally it influenced the more private biographical details — such as enduring anti-semiticism and the flight from Nazi Germany. Now, since the details of Einstein's ethnic heritage are clearly verifiable, including Einstein's own self-identification with the group, and they obviously played a notable role in his public and private life, I can see no reason at all not to include Einstein in these categories. siℓℓy rabbit ( talk) 13:44, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
Excuse me, but you are confusing several different things. I could self-identify as (say) Poldavian; this would not make my family Poldavian. There could be sources (such as, say, the League of Anti-Poldavians and the Lovers of Poldavianism) that might call me a Poldavian. This is different from a situation where there are sources stating that I drink coffee. At issue is whether we are going to have this sort of categorisation - I have already stated why calling it "ethnic" is ambiguous at best and fallacious at worst - and whether it makes any sense to copy other people's usage of these terms. We are not talking about facts, but rather about classification and language. Feketekave ( talk) 11:18, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
By the way - you are completely misstating my rationale. Feketekave ( talk) 11:28, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
One more thing: I agree completely that the purpose of categorisation is to serve as an aid to navigation. This is a strong argument in favour of eliminating most categories as applied to subjects of wikipedia biographies. It is extremely unlikely that somebody would learn about Einstein by going through a list of Swiss Jews (or, say Amateur violinists who lived in New Jersey). Feketekave ( talk) 11:44, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
Allow me to disagree. That is simply an article section on the different common usages of the word "Jewish" and "Jew". On other people's advice, I have started a thread at [ [12]]. That seems to be an appropriate place for a general discussion.
To sillyrabbit: I did not choose the discussion title, and, in fact, I find it supremely silly. If User:Silly rabbit believes it represents my position, then he is simply unable to read what I write.
We have no duty to categorise individuals as some sources do. There are some classifications that are not encyclopaedic: if many sources called an individual "wonderful", he would still not be called "wonderful" here. As User:Nbauman seems to indicate, this is a general issue that has been and has to be discussed. To try to solve it by WP:Verifiability is a strategy better left to silly rabbits. Feketekave ( talk) 13:00, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
I have seen a claim, on various places on the internet, and in a publication, that Einstein's last words are lost; since he said them in German and the only other person present didn't speak it. I cannot, however, find a reliable source for this. Is the statement true or false, and should it be mentioned either way? -- 70.171.186.233 ( talk) 02:51, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
In the long list of Einstein's ever-changing citizenship, there is a gap between 1896 and 1901. Does anyone know what his citizenship would have been during this period? Why the gap? Udibi ( talk) 06:49, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
So, at the end, should or shouldn't Einstein be called "Swiss-American"? Were these not his two nationalities during most of his adult life? Feketekave ( talk) 13:13, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
Deleted. Original here. -- Old Moonraker ( talk) 15:42, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
Why isn't there a mention about the famous tongue picture? 62.173.86.208 ( talk) 13:30, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
Youth and schooling:
→ nobody, not even einstein, begins his schooling in a gymnasium!
→ the gymnasium cannot have been (very) progressive, if einstein resented the school regime to the point of not finishing school.
→ ETH is the newer name (since 1911) of what was called "Eidgenössische Polytechnische Schule" ('Poly') in einsteins youth.
Marriage and family life:
→ i think it is appropriate to mention the fact, that elsa löwenthals maiden name was einstein, allthough she was only second cousin paternally. -- Ajnem ( talk) 18:31, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
"Rather than completing high school, Einstein decided to apply directly to the
Eidgenössische Polytechnische Schule (later
Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule ETH) in Zürich, Switzerland. Lacking a school certificate, he was required to take an entrance examination, which he did not pass, although he got exceptional marks in mathematics and physics. ... ...to finally enroll in 1896 in the mathematics and physics program at the Polytechnic. ... In the same year, Einstein's future wife,
Mileva Marić, also entered the Polytechnic to study mathematics and physics, as the only woman. During the next few years, Einstein and Marić's friendship developed into romance. Einstein graduated in 1900 with a diploma as a teacher for mathematics and physics."
if i'm not mistaken, both einstein and maric studied mathematics and physics. if that is so, please make the corrections.
The reason why Albert Einstein is not a featured article is because it is too long and goes too far in depth on some topics.
I would like to make Albert Einstein become a featured article again by shortening parts of it. But what sections should I start in? Any suggestions would be very helpful.
Thanks! Math Cool 10 03:17, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
I'm thankful for this article's depth. I wouldn't trim a thing. Johnlogic ( talk) 01:12, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
The problem with Einstein is that everybody wants a piece of him, so the article has accrued some information that is of little interest to most readers. The discussion of his technical work is already about as brief as it can be without becoming a distortion. Places to trim would be biographical trivia not directly bearing on his lifework and the lengthy discussion of his religious views, which could be boiled down to maybe two sentences. Editorial discretion is essential, in order to provide or link to information about specific items of notable special interest, e.g. whether Mileva contributed significantly to the theory of relativity. — DAGwyn ( talk) 15:50, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
I can not find this article to long. One clould cut down a little of the early life and his religios views. Imho this is no major problem.-- WerWil ( talk) 01:35, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
The two huge quotes under "Religious Views" should be cut or cut out. There is no justification for such whopping quotations. Myrvin ( talk) 21:38, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
This article claims Albert Einstein did not send his Nobel Prize money to his first wife, Mileva. A review of the reference page cited appears to indicate it to be a political opinion piece rather than fact based. I have read numerous accounts of Einstein's life and there appears to be considerable documentation in public records that he did, in fact, send the money as per their agreement. She used the money to purchase three apartment buildings outright. The buildings did not pay off nearly as well as she had hoped, but they did provide him with a comfortable living for the remainder of her life. In addition, their boys grew up with her, not Albert and Maric. CharmsDad ( talk) 23:03, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
... On 14 May 1904, Albert and Mileva's first son,
Hans Albert, was born in Berne, Switzerland. Their second son,
Eduard, was born in Munich Zurich on 28 July 1910.--
Ajnem (
talk)
08:57, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
you should include that he also took albanian nationality. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
212.156.173.181 (
talk)
19:05, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
This vandal should be flung out of Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.149.223.218 ( talk) 14:38, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
what did he practice? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.198.216.115 ( talk • contribs) 19:45, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
Under "Publications," the citation for "On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies" is given as being in the 17th issue of Annalen Der Physik, while it is actually published in issue 10. Velcrocookie ( talk) 22:45, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
There is an obvious error in the residency where it says Switzerland (1901-55)
BMatsuyama ( talk) 00:29, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
Isnt there a actual list? of books you can buy today ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.250.214.96 ( talk) 18:19, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
Impressive list of achievements in the intro, but shouldn't that list be somewhere in the text, and the list in the intro transmogrified into a paragraph describing his main achievements? After all: many of those items in the list are connected to each-other, f.ex. perihelion advance of Mercury (the planet! not the metal), and frame-dragging, are just corollaries of the general relativity. Therefore their mention could be subclauses or minor clauses after a main clause describing general relativity. ... said: Rursus ( bork²) 08:58, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
"At his mother's insistence, he took violin lessons starting at age six, and although he disliked them and eventually quit, he later took great pleasure in Mozart's violin sonatas."
This isn't cited.
A more correct version can be found here: http://www.oxfordtoday.ox.ac.uk/2008-09/v21n2/06.shtml as well as countless other reputable sources.
The majority of children who take lessons under their parent's "insistence" do not enjoy the lessons. This doesn't mean that Einstein quit or didn't enjoy playing. Playing and practicing are quite different. He played throughout his life, was considered to be quite good and clearly enjoyed himself.
Some sources say that his violin playing played an integral role in his ability to establish his theories. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.13.53.174 ( talk) 22:46, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
Shouldn't it be mentioned that many psychologists believe he had Asperger's Syndrome? TomCat4680 ( talk) 07:51, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
Not a content issue but a possible html syntax problem:
When using Windows XP, Internet Explorer 7, and Adobe Acrobat (both versions 6 and 8), the "printable version" of this page...
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Albert_Einstein&printable=yes
...the Adobe distiller fails and generates the text file
title=Albert_Einstein&print.log
%%[ ProductName: Distiller ]%% DejaVuSans not found, using Courier. %%[ Error: invalidfont; OffendingCommand: show ]%% Stack: (�) %%[ Flushing: rest of job (to end-of-file) will be ignored ]%% %%[ Warning: PostScript error. No PDF file produced. ] %%
All latest (v2.29) DejaVu fonts are installed, and never a problem with "printable version" to Adobe with any other page.
LBruns ( talk) 13:58, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
was there a misunderstanding in the 1905 papers I thought the first paper was amout Quanta light? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.198.216.115 ( talk) 23:07, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
EPR gets mentioned twice in the article but only in the most unillustrative way (in the intro it is just thrown out as an accomplishment, no elaboration; in the later section, it is described about its concern about non-locality, which is a very poor way of conveying what it means to Einstein). May I suggest that the intro bullet point be changed to "The EPR Paradox, a fundamental challenge to the metaphysical basis of quantum theory", and the later part be changed so as to convey that EPR is about whether or not quantum mechanics can be regarded as a "complete" theory, that is, whether it is a description of how the universe works or what our limitations for knowing it is. This was considered for many years to be a simply metaphysical question, unresolvable through experiment, but decades later Bell's theorem managed to show that aspects of it are indeed testable experimentally, and that these experiments have been carried out, and it turns out that Einstein was in fact incorrect—that the limitations of knowledge about quantum systems are inherent to the systems themselves, not simply to limitations in human knowledge. -- 140.247.242.83 ( talk) 19:33, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
On his quote about what world war 4 will be fought with, he did not say it will be fought with rocks, but sticks and stones. Please correct. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.58.161.219 ( talk) 21:44, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
Einstein is sometimes quoted by defenders of Pope Pius XII for saying that the Church was one of the only institutions that kept a voice during the national-socialist Reich. The quote is interesting because it provides insight on his views on other religions than his own, especially Christianity. [13] ADM ( talk) 08:58, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
It would add well to this article, and last time I checked Wikiquote does not have a full article on a single quote, but this is about Einstein--
72.74.112.203 (
talk)
14:43, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
Einstein's Jewish heritage was the most salient fact of his personal life outside of his career. Listing Einstein as "German-born" when he had to flee Nazi Germany at the height of his academic career does not do the subject justice and in fact is rather misleading. Even during WWI, Einstein stated "By heritage I am a Jew, by nationality Swiss, by conviction a human being and only a human being with no particular penchant for a state or national entity." —Preceding unsigned comment added by Archaeogenetics ( talk • contribs) 09:42, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
Would this satisfy folks? Bigweeboy ( talk) 15:10, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
Ok, y'all let's pick something and stick with it. If further dicsussion is needed then remove the phrase in question and we can discuss. If not, let's leave it as is and not keep flip-flopping. This would be a good justification for an editor to lock the page until a decision can be made. Varkstuff ( talk) 20:57, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
Hello fellow editors. I would like to open a friendly discussion on the External Links section. According to Wiki guidelines WP:EL external links should be kept to a minimum, ideally including only the link to an official site of the subject. We may want to trim the current list as some may be inappropriate for Wiki guidelines. We can decide together which ones to delete. Do you have any comments or initial feedback before I give more specific proposals on what I feel should be deleted? I will not remove anything without first discussing it here. :: ( talk) 12:27, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
I found listing "Ethnicity" of famous people in the fact box, along with residence and nationality, quite strange. My opinion: 1) It has nothing to do with the short biographic article. If ethnicity is somehow relevant, it could be mentioned in the article body (as it is done here). 2) Even if it has, its usage should be consistent. However, articles for Einstein fellow famous physicists (Bohr, Rutherford, Planck - to name a few) do not have the ethnicity entity). 3) The ethnicity line at the fact box should be dropped. The old and broad discussion could be found here Talk:Albert_Einstein/Archive_index#Ethnicity_field_of_infobox, but I believe the case is clear enough to make a decision without studying it in details and having it as a precedent. -- Dp074 ( talk) 12:12, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
Since Einstein is heralded as one of the smartest people to ever live (if not the smartest), I think it would be a good idea to mention his IQ somewhere, if it's known what it was. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.218.92.119 ( talk) 01:11, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
I doubt he ever took an IQ test. Did they even exist back then?-- Adam آدم ( talk) 19:36, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
The Link to Luitpold Gymnasium is wrong. Quote from the article: Albert Einstein is not an alumnus of this school.
He was on a school called "Luitpold Gymnasium" that is called now "Einstein Gymnasium". The todays "Luitpold Gymnasium" is not that one so please remove the link to that article. 138.246.7.49 ( talk) 18:11, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
After a very distasteful experience with the FA process I have abandoned work on this article. I have done a lot to it to get it up to status and if someone is interested they should be able to get it to FA status relatively quickly. Most of the remaining work is related to cleaning up and pruning down the references. I only post this here in the hopes that someone will take on the daunting challenge of navigating the hurdles and politics of the FA process. Just a heads up if you haven't been a major contributor to the article already, don't bother.-- Kumioko ( talk) 15:32, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
i was a certified nursing assistant in the 90's, i do not have the exact years however. dr. chowla, (who worked with and under Albert Einstein), was a patient there at Bethesda. The name was later changed to community care center. Dr Chowla was in his final years, and he was a patient in a very very understaffed facility, given very minimal care. He was slow on his feet, and very hard to understand, he spoke very slow and very softly. He was also a bit crippled up with what was referred to as elenphantitus, in the groin area. And as mentioned before being short staffed no one was around much to talk or help him out. One one particular day, have a bit of free time, helping him walk across the room, i asked him about his book case and hid collections of books the book case was filled with. It took a long time for it to register what he was talking about, i glanced at the books on the way by, and noticed there were several books by Albert Einstein, he kept trying to tell me he was in those books. After we got him seated again, i took up looking at some of them books, he had photographs, you could tell they were him, and of course, Albert Einstein, and there were many author signed books written to Dr. Chowla, from Albert Einstein, in fact there was a treasure trove of books and pictures and hand written signatures and notes, over a long span of time in this collection in this book case. Upon his death, no one came to collect much, and it was boxed up and put into storage, inside the facility, and some went to an outside storage aread, that i do not know of. There is a tremendous amount of knowledge, and information in the small area of Laramie, Wyoming, a terrible shame it is being lost sitting rotting in boxes somewhere around there. I have given my email address, if someone can contact me somehow, i would try and give any helpful information i might be able to give, as far as staff, and people who worked there around that time, and see if some of theses items could be retrieved, and archieved, and hopefully put in a museum somewhere.
thank you Justin Fredricks
<email removed> —Preceding unsigned comment added by Justinfordman ( talk • contribs) 06:09, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
I noticed the wikipedia article states that Roosevelt received the letter from Albert Einstein on August 2nd, 1939. This information is incorrect! The letter was finished and written on August 2nd, but Roosevelt did not receive the letter until October 11, 1939. The source referenced in the article was correct, http://www.mphpa.org/index2.php?option=com_content&do_pdf=1&id=172 but apparently misread by the author of the wikipedia article.
64.251.144.132 ( talk) 00:35, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
I made the proposed copy editing changes I referred to above, but I saved the material I replaced on my computer and can add it back if too many people lose their sangfroid over this. It seemed to me that we really need to step back with this. I got through the first 1/3 of the article with additional copy editing (as far as the section on collaboration with others), and will come back later in the week to finish. -- Auntieruth55 ( talk) 20:53, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
I fixed a couple of minor punctuation problems and mismatched verb tenses.
In this section (Paper on mass–energy equivalence) the footnote is not formatted properly. Or maybe that is the way you are formatting some of his letters? That is confusing to me.
The ethnicity thing. Perhaps a way to deal with it is not to deal with it, but to say instead in the first sentence where he was born. For example:
Albert Einstein (pronounced /ˈælbərt ˈaɪnstaɪn/; German: De-Albert Einstein.oga [ˈalbɐt ˈaɪ̯nʃtaɪ̯n] ; 14 March 1879, Ulm, Württemberg, Germany – 18 April 1955, Princeton, New Jersey, US) was
an ethnically Jewish,[1][2] German-born, theoretical physicistof the 20th centurybest known for his theories of special relativity and general relativity and his lifelong support for a Jewish homeland and the Zionist movement.
Einstein
Healso contributed to statistical mechanics, especially his treatment of Brownian motion,hisresolution of the paradox of specific heats andhisconnection of fluctuations and dissipation. Despite his reservations about its interpretation, Einstein alsomade contributionscontributed to the development of quantum mechanics and, indirectly, quantum field theory, primarily through his theoretical studies of the photon.[3]
By linking to his scientific work and to Zionism, we draw attention to the three things which shaped his life. We don't need to say 20th century, because that is self-evident. We don't need to say "German" because that is also clear from the place of birth, and the box, and you go into it in detail later. By breaking the paragraph after that point, we focus attention clearly on his major contributions and the Jewishness issue. The second paragraph of the intro then deals with additional contributions. I suggestion using the word "contributed" (or something like it), rather than "he made contributions to..." Much more active tense. If you want to add religion, put it in the box as "Agnostic"...no need to make a fuss over it. He didn't, after all!
Good article. It needs another pair of eyes to make sure it's consistently punctuated. -- Auntieruth55 ( talk) 15:36, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
This edit "condensed" the section, but the next-but-one edit, from the same contributor, deleted it in favor of a small infobox. Can this important period in Einstein's life be satisfactorily represented in an infobox? I suggest reinstating the contributor's "condensed", textual version. -- Old Moonraker ( talk) 06:49, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
As much as everyone would like to co-opt Einstein, he was first and foremost a physicist. His contributions to physics are many, but it is important to list those which are foundational. The ones listed in the intro (with the exception of capillary action) are all enormous contributions, which would justify an article on someone else, had someone else discovered them. Unfortunately, I restored this by copy and paste, so there are missing references and bold and the like. Likebox ( talk) 17:56, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
... kann Ihnen aber zu meiner grossen Freude sagen, dass ich die grosse Energie und Konsequenz Ihres Denkens aufrichtig bewundere. Es ist der erste mir zu Gesicht gekommene Versuch, die gesamte menschliche Geistesleben auf biologische Elementar-Phänomene Zurückzuführen inclusive der pathologischen Phänomene.
{{
cite journal}}
: Unknown parameter |month=
ignored (
help)
Powell… proclaims a new faith, one he calls sci/religion, that blends elements of the experimental and the mystical. The founder and greatest prophet of this religion, says Powell, is Albert Einstein, who recognized the search for truth as any inherently spiritual endeavor and who preached the doctrines of unity, simplicity, and universality.
{{
cite web}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help)
{{
citation}}
: Missing or empty |title=
(
help)
Albert Einstein ( /ˈælbərt ˈaɪnstaɪn/; German: ; 14 March 1879 – 18 April 1955) was an ethnically Jewish [1] [2], German-born theoretical physicist. He is best known for his theories of special relativity and general relativity. Einstein received the 1921 Nobel Prize in Physics "for his services to Theoretical Physics, and especially for his discovery of the law of the photoelectric effect." [3]
Einstein's many contributions to physics include:
Einstein published more than 300 scientific works and more than 150 non-scientific works. [4] [5] In 1999 Time magazine named him the Person of the Century, and in the words of a biographer, "to the scientifically literate and the public at large, Einstein is synonymous with genius." [6]
By heritage I am a Jew, by nationality Swiss, by conviction a human being and only a human being with no particular penchant for a state or national entity.
{{
cite book}}
: Check |url=
value (
help); Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors=
(
help)
{{
cite book}}
: |author=
has generic name (
help) His non-scientific works include: About Zionism: Speeches and Lectures by Professor Albert Einstein (1930), "Why War?" (1933, co-authored by
Sigmund Freud), The World As I See It (1934), Out of My Later Years (1950), and a book on science for the general reader,
The Evolution of Physics (1938, co-authored by
Leopold Infeld).
I removed the following from the Cold War era section:
I personally don't think this belongs in the article at all, since it seems not to have played a major role in Einstein's life. It certainly doesn't seem like something that should be discussed in a section largely devoted to Einstein and the Cold War. Does this really truly belong in the article? If so, is there a better place to put it? Sławomir Biały ( talk) 14:03, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
I hope this doesn’t trigger yet another round of fruitless discussion, but… How do other people feel about changing “ German-born” to “ German-Jewish-born”? Such a change would satisfy my concern that the first sentence be brief and defensible against additions of other labels such as Swiss and American. I previously proposed something similar, but Geeman objected for reasons I do not understand. Perhaps this is something we can agree on. -- teb728 21:17, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
Which way? (and I fixed my last comment here-please read it a gain...:-)--
Gilisa 07:29, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Epson291 , forgot about my last comment (which is now striked) I think that we better live the status quo as it is .It get to my knowledge that this is the best way to obtein Einstein Jewishness along with his German history in a very balanced way , not ideal , but there is nothing better for now.--
Gilisa
07:48, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Surprised it's such a source of contention. Is the contention to do with hostility to him being acknowledged publicly as Jewish for some strange reason or it being a prominent feature? Note for example Brittanica which mentions it ("Einstein's parents were secular, middle-class Jews") within the first two paragraphs. [1] LiberalViews 23:07, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
Why is there no mention of the fact the the FBI kept a 1,427 page document of einstein's affiliation with 34 communist fronts and service as an honorary chairman for three communist organizations? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 64.81.227.133 ( talk) 05:43, 10 May 2007 (UTC).
Einstein was, however, a self avowed radical and a socialist. He helped found the influential socialist journal Monthly Review, and wrote an [[[article]]] for the first issue in 1949 called "why socialism?". I find it appalling that the Wiki article about Einstein remarks heavily about his Zionism but says virtually nothing whatsoever about his socialist convictions. Besides at least HAVING A LINK TO THE ARTICLE HE WROTE, there are other sources and means of characterizing his politics that have not been explored. For instance, Monthly Review ran an article on Einstein's politics in the May 2005 issue entitled, "Albert Einstein, Radical" by John J. Simon. The red-baiting intentions of the poster of this comment aside, we should conclude that the omission of the radical left-wing nature of Einstein's politics is not only egregious, but likely intentional.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.53.11.40 ( talk • contribs) 17:39, 28 May 2007.
The template says partial protection, but it seems to be full. -- Allen 04:03, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
“I should much rather see reasonable agreement with the Arabs on the basis of living together in peace than the creation of a Jewish state. Apart from practical consideration, my awareness of the essential nature of Judaism resists the idea of a Jewish state with borders, an army, and a measure of temporal power, no matter how modest. I am afraid of the inner damage Judaism will sustain - especially from the development of a narrow nationalism within our own ranks, against which we have already had to fight strongly, even without a Jewish state.” – Albert Einstein
http://globalwebpost.com/farooqm/writings/other/einstein.htm
Einstein is often portrayed as a Zionist and a supporter of the Jewish state. I believe that it would be important to demonstrate that he had serious reservations about the establishment of a Jewish state. Einstein's quotes deserve to be posted in their entirety. Only posting a portion of a quotation does not do him justice and often serves to misrepresent his positions.
Sunspot123 05:37, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
there is talk that einstien had aspergers syndrome (autism in a person with extremaly superior brain functioning) should we mention this, note: people with dissabilitys are not stupid, the fact einstien was a genius dose not mean he did not have a disability, genius is actually a symptom of aspergers, among other things ofcourse —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 172.206.77.234 ( talk) 15:17:23, August 19, 2007 (UTC)
ofcourse its too late to actualy properly diagnose him but we do know he had some form of of disability, probably aspergers but it may be ADHD or dyslexia, we should atleast mentuion that he had a disability but were unsure on witch one —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 172.206.77.234 ( talk) 20:13, August 20, 2007 (UTC)
yes i agree that aspergers isent really a disability if thats what you mean —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.213.88.85 ( talk) 19:30, August 28, 2007 (UTC)
to the above he did have friends but he had friends who had leanrned to accept his social misunderstanding, just because your autistc dosent mean you dont get friends —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.201.197.61 ( talk • contribs) 10:15, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
Research has been carried by Simon Baron-Cohen and others into the possibility that Einstein, and others such as Isaac Newton, had AS or even HFA. They have concluded that Einstein probably had HFA, due to the delay in language acquisition during his childhood. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 143.117.23.221 ( talk) 12:16, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
This article is very well written, and appears to be very complete and informative. It's a pretty good and accurate description of Einstein's life. A good, thorough copyedit would be good, as there are still a couple errors in the prose, mainly things like some structural grammar and punctuation issues (commas not being there when they should, etc).
The main issue holding this article up from GA status at the present time is references. There's still a lot of unsourced information, primarily earlier in the article, but a couple later on. There's some pretty bold statements that lack references as well. Examples:
The other major issue with the references is that both Harvard references and inline citations are used in the article, and there doesn't seem to be any pattern over the types of information that either are used on -- it's pretty haphazard. While WP:CITE doesn't really say which citation format you should use (it talks about both, and lets editors decide), it doesn't look very professional to use both in the same document. Although I can see a justification for citing books written by Einstein himself using the Harvard method, and everything else using inline citations, since this would also produce a nice list of his own books and publications at the end of the article, while still leaving most of the other citations in the other footnote format.
Overall, I think the article is very close to GA status, so I will put this on hold until October 9, 2007 (or sooner, if you can fix the issues). Cheers! Dr. Cash 05:21, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
I believe this article now meets the Good Article criteria, and will be listed. Good work! Dr. Cash 01:46, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
Can someone please add an important quote to Einstiens article? It is "We cannot fix our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them" Thanks!!! Dustihowe 16:10, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
I heard a story about how Albert Einstein's last words are unknown because he told them to a nurse who didn't speak German. Shouldn't this be on here?
“ | Last week Professor Einstein trudged no more in the grounds of his beloved institute. A lingering gall-bladder infection sent him to the hospital. Blood began to escape from his aorta, the main artery. Shortly after midnight he muttered a few sentences in German. The night nurse could not understand, and the last words of the modern world's greatest scientist were lost. At 1:15 a.m. Albert Einstein, 76, died in his sleep. | ” |
I added the IPA for Einstein in English (check if correct). His being German/Swiss would account for the German (and native) pronunciation. Since he became an American citizen however, and lived in the United States the rest of his life, it's only fair to include the English pronunciation of his name, otherwise it would appear to the reader only the German way to say it, is proper, when the truth is, no one speaking English would say, "shtein" instead of "stein" when speaking German names. Epson291 08:10, 11 October 2007 (UTC)it
Since you two clearly don't agree on pronunciation, let me ask again: Why does this article need any pronunciation?! -- teb728 22:41, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
Why isn't the Nobel Prize icon next to his name? MLK, Elie Wiesel, and Al Gore all have it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.255.141.51 ( talk) 19:31, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
Of the three paragraphs below which were in the ‘Religious views’ section, user DAGwyn ( talk · contribs), with "Removed advertisements for causes with minor or nonexistent connections to Einstein" in the edit summary, removed the first two entirely and removed the second sentence from the third paragraph:
(1) Einstein championed the work of psychologist Paul Diel, [1] which posited a biological and psychological, rather than theological or sociological, basis for morality. [2]
(2) Einstein was an Honorary Associate of the Rationalist Press Association beginning in 1934, and was an admirer of Ethical Culture. [3] He served on the advisory board of the First Humanist Society of New York [4] [5]
(3) His friend Max Jammer explored Einstein's views on religion thoroughly in the 1999 book Einstein and Religion: Physics and Theology. [6] Corey S. Powell, [7] in the 2002 book God in the Equation: How Einstein Became the Prophet of the New Religious Era, considers Einstein the founder of what Powell, the executive editor of Discover magazine, calls sci/religion. [8]
In the next edit, the same user, with "EB online article has less information than we do, and contains errors which their editors refused to correct" in the edit summary, removed the {{ Britannica}} template. Perhaps it should be restored (see what links to it), I don't know.
I will leave the Paul Diehl, Rationalist Press Association, Ethical Culture, or Humanist Society material and citations to others, because I'm not equipped to evaluate them. The Powell book is not an “advertisement” for anything. I restored the line, simplifying its citation. — Athaenara ✉ 08:04, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
Epson291 changed the German and English pronunciations from [ˈalbɐt ˈaɪ̯nʃtaɪ̯n] and /ˈælbɝt ˈaɪnstaɪn/ respectively to [ˈalbɐt ˈaɪ̯nʃtaɪ̯n] and [ˈælbɝt ˈaɪnstaɪn] with the summary “Confused, one IPA had slashes, the other brackets, changed the second IPA to square brackets.” I know that for most people there is no difference. But if we are to use only slashes or only brackets, it should be slashes. In case you are interested, brackets indicate an exact phonetic pronunciation. Slashes indicate a phonemic pronunciation, where the exact pronunciation depends on the dialect. In particular, the exact pronunciation of /ɝ/ depends on whether one speaks a rhotic dialect. -- teb728 t c 07:15, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
and a poll of prominent physicists named him the greatest physicist of all time.[4] The reference links to a BBC web site which refers to an article in Physics World, instead link directly to the article published in Physics World, apart from being the original source it's far more interesting. The link is: http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/print/851 Jellycats ( talk) 23:44, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
I've been trying to find out exactly what the nature was of Einstein's formal education beyond secondary school. The WP entry merely says "Einstein graduated in 1900 from ETH with a degree in physics." The entry's source footnote links to a biographical site which states is no more helpful: he "...enrolled at the Swiss Federal Polytechnic School in Zurich. Albert graduated in 1900 with a degree in physics." I don't know about anyone else here, but the term "degree" doesn't satisfy my curiosity. What kind of degree? -Associate? -Ph.D? Surely we can do better than that! Does anyone have any reliable info about what level of a degree it was, and if there was a field of study more specific than just "physics"? Bricology ( talk) 02:01, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
Does anyone else have a problem hearing his entire name on the audio file at the very benginning of the article? I propose we take it off until a better one is found. 128.194.21.91 ( talk) 21:11, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
Albert Einstein was not an excellent student in elementary school. He was a failure/underachiever in all subjects excluding mathematics and science. His parents suspected him of the problem of having mental retardation because of it. I propose that this mistake be fixed before someone else receives the wrong information. 69.231.129.91 ( talk) 20:15, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
The German translation of the English sentences are: "Diese Suppe ist zu heiß!", "So, Du kannst sprechen. Warum hast Du bis heute nichts gesagt?", "Bis jetzt ist alles in Ordnung gewesen." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.176.201.66 ( talk) 21:57, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
The only US museum dedicated to Albert Einstein is at Landau, a family run retail store that sells fine woolens. There have been proposals to have the State of New Jersey build a museum to Einstein; so far the State has declined to do so. Further information about the Landau Museum is available here: http://www.landauprinceton.com/einstein-museum/ 17:44, 18 January 2008 (UTC)John Rydberg
why dont u have that famous picture of him with his tongue out? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.155.201.195 ( talk) 20:51, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
It would be good to add some info on his sense of humor or a few quotes. Anyone know any sources?-- DatDoo ( talk) 03:54, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
I removed the following problematic paragraph:
If the marriage was beset by financial worries, there should be a citation. In any case contrary to the implication, such worries probably were not the cause of the divorce. Hans was the engineer, and Eduard the schizophrenic. Contrary to the implication, Albert and Elsa moved to Princeton many years after their marriage.
This:
is not supported by the source provided:
I have just read the chapter "Moonlighting in the Patent Office" (thanks, Google Books), and I haven't found the words "waste of Einstein's talents" nor anything equivalent. The word "moonlighting" is not necessarily a negative word implying the waste of someone's talents, this may also be a positive word (see e.g. [3] [4]). The word should not be interpreted in a biased manner. (-- Edcolins ( talk) 17:26, 5 February 2008 (UTC))
Besides, when first looking at the cover page of the book "The Complete Idiot's Guide to Understanding Einstein", with much respect to the author of the book, this is not exactly the kind of book I would consider to be a reference book on the subject. That is, I wouldn't cite the source. What do you think? --
Edcolins (
talk)
17:26, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
The discussion below involves the proposed integration (not necessary sequentially) of the following two aspects of Einstein's religious views:
I believe that Einstein's view on Jesus is important to include because it provides important context to his statements about not believing in a personal god. I believe that Einstein's view on the church is important because it shows that his views changed dramatically throughout his life - something that isn't otherwise captured in the Wikipedia article.
The section does seem to be a bit long. I noticed that his views on a personal god are repeated in two paragraphs. Perhaps they could be pared down. -- Ed Brey ( talk) 01:50, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
(unindent) I would also like to add, with the possibility of starting a new discussion on this topic in the near future, that the religious views section was repeatedly mentioned during the Featured article review, in which the article was delisted. The reviewers implored the editors to use fewer quotes in the section, and so trim the text down as well, calling the current section "amateurish" and criticizing its exclusive reliance on "dueling quotes." I also happen to believe that the section would benefit, not from more quotes, but from fewer quotes, summarizing the main points where appropriate. Silly rabbit ( talk) 14:28, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
(unindent) I agree with your concerns about primary sources in general. But do they apply to this case? Specifically, can you quote the debatable conclusions for me? Given the length and depth of Einstein's remarks, how likely would you say it is that he was just being agreeable? If the acceptance standard for primary sources were so high to throw these out, it would seem that one would have to throw out nearly all primary sources for any article. As to relevance, I understand your point given the size of the section, which can be addressed by refactoring the section to move the sources externally. -- Ed Brey ( talk) 12:08, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
I agree that the quotations make up too much of the section. I would favor moving most, if not all, quotes over to wikiquote, which would leave lots of room to capture the aspects of his religious views that have been brought up so far in a tidy-sized section. Thoughts on that? -- Ed Brey ( talk) 23:33, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
Shouldn't we have a daughter article on this subject? We have one for Charles Darwin's views on religion, and Einstein is of similar notability, both in general and for his religious views. There also seems to be a whole book on the subject (Einstein and Religion : Physics and Theology by Max Jammer, also used as a reference at one point). If someone can write an almost 300 page book on this topic surely we can write an article on it. Richard001 ( talk) 00:18, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Aren't these contradictory labels? Socialism (as preached by all socialists except the libertarian socialists) requires the use of force which contradicts the tenets of pacifism. afr3 ( talk) 07:54, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
I've read numerous times in biographies and scientific books that Einstein was at one point offered to become President of Israel shortly after it was created, but he turned the offer down..
Is this true? I see no mention of it in the article...
Gamer112 ( talk) 07:36, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
Albert Einstein's father died in 1902, shortly after giving his permission for his son to marry Mileva, and not in 1910, before the birth of his second grandson. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.59.61.49 ( talk) 01:09, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
Can anyone direct me to a resource that indicates which languages Einstein was fluent in? I'm guessing German and English, doubtfully Yiddish...but any others? As a pioneer in a rapidly developing area, I expect he'd want to keep up with breakthroughs in the journals of his era. I've found it a curiously difficult thing to research for any historical figure, at least in terms of generating a complete list. Asat ( talk) 13:51, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
write in English. Einstein said that he preferred to write in German. He said that he could remember the English words all right, but could not cope with the treacherous spelling. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.138.211.50 ( talk) 09:35, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
It would be cool if putting in Nick The Greek's reported nickname for Einstein redirected to this page. 69.108.24.80 ( talk) 16:40, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
"What are you talking about" is my exact question to you. It's pretty easy to find out what I'm talking about. The Nick the Greek/Einstein story is well-known, and if you don't just google it. 68.123.158.127 ( talk) 16:38, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
Einstein was a Zionist and supporter of Chaim Weizmann and Theodore Herzl, but the article so far has much more of his criticism of the far right in Israel/the Yishuv. Consequently, it looks like he was far more critical of Israel and its founding than he actually was. I am a new editor on Wikipedia, so I am hesitant to be aggressive on this issue - I have to date made only minor modifications pending further talk and consideration. - Jameseavesjo
I thought the information on the wiki page 'Albert Einstein' was born into a jewish family, there is a greater chance of him being jewish. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Superman417 ( talk • contribs) 01:06, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
Citizenship in Switzerland is by canton, rather than nation-wide. Perhaps this should be made clear in Einstein's biography. -- Wloveral ( talk) 21:48, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
I don't know if anybody ever looked at what a complicated citizenship life Einstein had. From the Wiki article on Einstein, section "Youth and Schooling" it says.
So from 1896 he was a stateless person (refugee?) living in Switzerland in the Canton of Aargau. Was renouncing German or Württemberg citizenship that easy for a 17 year old -- even with his father's approval in 1896?
And in February 1901 he received Swiss citizenship in the Canton of Zürich.
The site: [5] which is given as reference number 13 above further states:
On site [6], listed as reference number 14 above, it indicates that he renounced his German or Württemberg citizenship on January 28, 1896 so he was stateless for over five years.
The same site appears to indicate that he took Austrian (Austro-Hungarian?) citizenship in 1911 as part of a University posting in Prague, Bohemia. It also indicates that Einstein regained German citizenship in April 1914 , before the start of WW 1, as a result of his entering the German (Prussian?) civil service as a member of the Prussian Academy of Sciences and professor at the University of Berlin. Loosing it in March 1932 when he left Germany. Were the Austrian and the second German citizenships job related documents?
From 1932 to 1940 he only held Swiss citizenship. And in 1940 he received U.S. citizenship.
Does anyone else think that just the various citizenships that he held was complicated? I won't even start on his two marriages. The first one was quite complicated.-- TGC55 ( talk) 01:38, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
Whats the reason? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 219.73.1.127 ( talk) 04:50, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
he was maried two a women and they had two sons then they had a divorce and then he got married to his COUSIN —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.45.70.134 ( talk) 21:34, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
There is vandalism on the main page. I would love to edit it but the article is locked. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 158.125.189.206 ( talk) 13:16, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
I've changed the Jewish ethnicity to Semitic. Whether "Jewish" is an ethnicity or not is debatable, and Hebrew/Semitic is a more correct term. Intranetusa 04:15, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
Judaism is not an ethnicity- it is a religious faith. To say that Judaism is an ethnicity is falling into the trap that the Nazis did- a Jew is a Jew by religious choice- saying that it is an ethnicity negates any conversions that take place in or out of the faith which is absurd. I can't believe that wikipedia allows this to stand. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dbmerge ( talk • contribs) 01:01, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
Shalom, everyone! I lived in Israel for six month, took a class on Jewish ethnic minorities at Haifa University, and as an aspiring cultural anthropologist, and now currently take five anthropology classes including one on Ethnicity, I have great news for you all! Yes, wait for it... Jewish-ness is, in fact, an ethnicity. I really don't know what you people are rambling about... frankly, don't have time to read through all these silly ideas you people have. Jewish ethnicity is complicated, but it's a fact. It exists. End of story. Learned to live with it, love it. Oh, and unless I've been misinformed all of my life, Einstein is a Jew. I'm a big fan of his: a bobble-head and a portrait to prove it. But here's the kicker, to answer the none-sense about how Jewish ethnicity is Nazi propaganda! If you convert to Orthodox Judaism, you become ethnically Jewish. It's magical and bizarre, I know, but that's how it works. Philolexica ( talk) 14:28, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
Another editor added "Religion = Judaism" to the infobox, which I reverted because in previous reading here I'd seen discussion where the conclusion 'seemed' to be "this is far from obvious, not simple, and even applying a tag would be misleading".
I've a question I'd like to ask, as I've not seen such a thing elsewhere, even on articles with years-long arguments on fine points, that were 'finally' resolved to one consensus or another. Would it be useful to have a small section above that gives a short summary list of difficult/contentious issues and their consensus outcome? Something like:
I thought something like this would be a great thing to ask a new editor to look at, after reverting their reflex change of a 'difficult' item 'obvious' to them, like, uh, I just did. :-( Has anyone here seen anything like this done on other articles? Shenme ( talk) 22:34, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi all,
I'm about to nominate List of scientific publications of Albert Einstein as a Featured List candidate, but I'd welcome your suggestions before I do. As you might notice, it's been a ton of work, so please be gentle in your criticisms; thank you! :) Willow ( talk) 12:16, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
In the section on religious views the following quote is found:
"In view of such harmony in the cosmos which I, with my limited human mind, am able to recognize, there are yet people who say there is no God. But what really makes me angry is that they quote me for the support of such views."
Most of the quotes in this section are first-hand, direct quotes from Einstein's writings. But the source of this quote says "Albert Einstein, according to the testimony of Prince Hubertus of Lowenstein; as quoted by Ronald W. Clark, Einstein: The Life and Times, New York: World Publishing Company, 1971, p. 425."
It's important to distinguish it from the first-hand quotes in the article. It's filtered through the memories and prejudices of two people. Pol098 ( talk) 12:52, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
Dear TEB728, why did you consider the link to Bloomsbury Auctions as a "spam"? The website (the original link to which was not due to me, although I was responsible for changing it from a loose link into a cited reference) shows the actual letter, which I consider as very valuable — it shows that the letter is hand-written and includes many corrections; one normally assumes that Einstein must have let the letter be typed by his secretary. Given the fact that the letter is likely to disappear in a private collection, I propose to restore the link to Bloomsbury Auctions. Kind regards, --BF 02:20, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
(outdent) BF, Please read WP:AGF. I am acting in good faith, and I assume you also are acting in good faith. I fail to see, however, the reason for your fantasizing my motives:
Let me add to what I said in my first two posts: I looked again at the Bloomsbury Auctions scans and their quality is pretty bad. It seems to me that this low quality makes them of little value either as a specimen of Einstein’s handwriting or as a source for original research. — teb728 t c 08:48, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
OK, I'll give this a shot, even though requests posted on Wikipedia:Third opinion should reference disputes involving no more than two editors, and I see more than two here. In my opinion:
In any third opinion dispute between two parties, the third opinion giver has to choose sides. I'm sorry but while I agree that BF and teb have been acting in good faith, and that both have eloquently stated their positions, I have to say that I would have probably reverted BF's contribution myself if I had seen it first. ~ Amatulić ( talk) 21:49, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
BF: I didn't see "so much opposition" - only opposition by one person in particular. I have no doubt that the letter is valuable to include in the article, but the way you included it, by linking to a temporary page, wasn't workable. That, and the fact that your accompanying description could be considered somewhat spammy, are why I said I would have deleted the link. If you can find another reproduction of it, please do include it. It would be a shame if something like that were lost. I have not said that readers wouldn't be interested in such a thing; in fact I disagree with that sentiment. This is an encyclopedia after all; its function is to be, well, encyclopedic.
To TEB: I'll address the points discussed on 19 May:
Those are my views. Hope it helps. ~ Amatulić ( talk) 23:42, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
Amatulić’s reply to BF’s 20 May post clarifies the issue for me in a way that suggests a compromise. The issue is inclusionism:
The fact that Wikipedia is a web encyclopedia has three important consequences: On the one hand, it means that virtually anything could be added to the encyclopedia. After all, it’s just gigabytes; it doesn’t cost any trees. On the other hand, it creates a practical limit on the size of articles, as discussed in WP:SIZE. In compensation for that limit, however, it encourages sub-articles; for an interested reader, a sub-article is only a click away.
The Albert Einstein article is now 83 KB long—rather over the recommended size. I don’t usually think about it this way, but I guess this fact is the main reason I resist adding relatively unimportant content to the article. Several major sections already have been split out into sub-articles. If the same were done with the “Religious view” section, the sub-article would have dozens of kilobytes available for the kind of details BF wants to add. And I would have no problem with adding them there.
As for the Bloomsbury Auctions link, the page is still there, but requires a free registration for access. I am not sure whether that sort of thing is appropriate for Wikipedia. If it is, I would have no problem with linking it from a sub-article. (The letter was estimated to sell for £8000 but sold for £170000. Wow!)
As for the Randerson article, I agree with BF that it is well written. But although it was written in reaction to the Gutkind letter, it is not a particularly good reference for the letter. Rather it seems to me its importance is as an overview of Einstein’s religious views. I think it would be an appropriate external reference in a sub-article. — teb728 t c 00:53, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
Can someone clarify what is a "Middlesex heir"? Is it someone from Middlesex County (not, I dare say, the county of Middlesex) who was heir to something? Or was there someone called Middlesex who had heirs? Myrvin ( talk) 12:47, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
The list of scientific publications by Albert Einstein is a Featured List candidate. If you care at all about Albert Einstein articles on Wikipedia, please review the list and either support it or oppose it at its candidacy. Thank you! Willow ( talk) 18:52, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
It somewhat bothers me that the change to refer to the list of scientific publications has lost the non-scientific publications. Perhaps the original "Works" article ought to be restored. — DAGwyn ( talk) 18:50, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
The way that section was written seems to conflate Judaism and Zionism, and implies Einstein's cultural and religious background automatically associated him with the actions of Israel's government, despite the fact that his philosophy and writing imply otherwise. Perhaps that section should be renamed "Einstein's relationship to/philosophy on the state of Israel". Absolute Relativity ( talk) 03:55, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
"In a 1954 letter, Einstein rejected the idea that the Jews are God's chosen people." Okay, this is very interesting, but shouldn't this be in the religious views section, not the politics section? Whyzeee ( talk) 08:46, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
1) If you want to claim that Einstein opposed political Zionism please include a source.
2) Why did you delete the phrase "Despite his years of Zionist efforts..."? Are you denying that Einstein ever made any Zionist efforts? Whyzeee ( talk) 09:22, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
Why isn't there any mention of Einstein and his Russian lover Margarita Konenkova here? It turns out that she was a KGB spy, but alas, Einstein probably did not know it 71.103.0.107 ( talk) 04:25, 30 May 2008 (UTC)Serkan.
It seems odd that under the "influences" section there is only one mention. At the very least I think the following should be added:
Baruch Spinoza Immanuel Kant Ernst Mach
I imagine there are others but these three, at the very least, strike me as some that should be mentioned.
Somrh ( talk) 06:58, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
In the Collaboration and conflict section, there is a link to determinism in the sentence
Einstein's disagreement with Bohr revolved around the idea of scientific determinism
. This needs to be changed to a link to Scientific determinism, which is pointedly different than the philosophical question of determinism that is currently shown. 75.151.79.169 ( talk) 20:53, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
A physicist in Prague, Ludek Zakel, claims to be the son of Albert Einstein and his second wife, Elsa, given at birth in a Prague hospital to Mrs. Zakel, whose own son, born at the same time, had died. (Zakel himself has no web presence that I can find, so I conclude he was not, himself, a notable person.) Stories about Zakel and his claims have been published the NYT http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=990CE4DC1F3AF931A15754C0A963958260 and in TIME magazine, although that was a long time ago, and I found no TIME article on the internet. The story presented in the NYT article is believable, and so I think that reporting this claim is appropriate on this page. What do others think about this? (Please read the article before deciding.) Vegasprof ( talk) 20:56, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
this article is way to long! shorten it to seperate articles-- Nick54321blastoff ( talk) 05:03, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
hi,
he's been nominated 50 times before receiving the prize. [8] i think this is quite an interesting info.
216.80.119.92 ( talk) 20:14, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
"The word god is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation no matter how subtle can (for me) change this".
In light of the above newly available quote, are we now justified in identifying Einstein as an atheist? Nick Graves ( talk) 02:22, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
I think Einstein left this point on religion clearly stated, there are plenty of references on this, however the discussion is very interesting,indeed, please do not stop. Missingdata1 ( talk) 15:03, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
"I received your letter of June 10th. I have never talked to a Jesuit priest in my life and I am astonished by the audacity to tell such lies about me. From the viewpoint of a Jesuit priest I am, of course, and have always been an atheist. - Albert Einstein, letter to Guy H. Raner Jr, July 2, 1945,"
Greg Locock ( talk) 11:24, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
Einstein's position on theism seemed to change throughout his life. As we seem to be dealing with quotations (for some reason or another), he started of with the infamous quote;
"I want to know how God created this world. I am not interested in this or that phenomenon, in the spectrum of this or that element. I want to know His thoughts; the rest are details."
And seemed to end on this:
"I'm not an atheist. The human mind is not capable of grasping the Universe. We are like a little child entering a huge library. The walls are covered to the ceilings with books in many different tongues. The child knows that someone must have written these books. It does not know who or how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. But the child notes a definite plan in the arrangement of the books---a mysterious order which it does not comprehend, but only dimly suspects."
From what I can asertain, Einstein seemed to be at points either a psuedo-pantheist or quasi-agnostic. The question of God is an open one for Einstein, he was neither this or that, but had a quite respect for the "mysterious order" that "governs the universe". —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
84.70.26.240 (
talk)
17:06, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
Humanist seems to the best description for him Absolute Relativity ( talk) 03:55, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
That's a stretch. Wikifan12345 ( talk) 23:32, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
I would have to agree with the unsigned user that "pantheist" would probably be the most appropriate label if any were appropriate. Einstein was heavily influenced by Baruch Spinoza and made reference to this fact (including reference to god). What we get from Spinoza is a god is not "supernatural" or outside the universe creating the universe or a "personal god" concerned with the affairs of human beings but rather we get a "naturalized" god who was equated with nature. Much of Einstein's comments about "god" can be interpreted as that overall deterministic order to the universe of which Einstein and other scientists were attempting to uncover. Somrh ( talk) 06:51, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
Einstein was quoted as saying that he was not an atheist and did not think he was a pantheist. By what I have read, I think that he was a deist. -- UberScienceNerd Talk Contributions 21:22, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
so with all these conflicting reports, why label him at all? its not like religious view-point changes the significance of his work. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.45.106.103 ( talk) 10:22, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
In regards to Einstein's religious views he was certainly not an atheist, many quotes from him can point to this conclusion. Does this 1954 letter that Wikipedia mentions but I have seen no reference to in other sources even exist? There seems to have been no follow up in proving that this letter was written by him. I would not refer to the letter as fact like the article does. Overall I would say this site
http://www.einsteinandreligion.com/ does the best job of covering Einstein's views. It is impossible to label the man but I would say the closest you could get is some sort of Deist. A man who seemed to believe that the laws of the universe originated from some higher power and were not just "there", but nothing beyond that.
24.177.251.86 (
talk)
06:05, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
You wouldn't know it from this article! 99.140.200.24 ( talk) 03:23, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
I have here a toy that my colleagues bought for my little daughter. The toy is made by the "Baby Einstein Company, LLC". Down the bottom of the packaging it says:
Surely not! Can anyone confirm? - Tbsdy lives ( talk) 06:05, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
There is a mistake in the second paragraph, in the following statement: "and his general theory of relativity, which extended the principle of relativity to non-uniform motion,". To show that this is a mistake, I quote from the popular General Relativity textbook entitled Spacetime and Geometry: An Introduction to General Relativity, by Sean M. Carrol. In section 1.2, p.11, he says: "The notion of acceleration in special relativity has a bad reputation, for no good reason...In particular, there is no truth to the rumor that SR is unable to deal with accelerated trajectories, and general relativity must be invoked. General relativity becomes relevant in the presence of gravity, when spacetime becomes curved."
I am not well enough versed in relativity to change the article. But would somebody else please correct this mistake? -- Singularitarian ( talk) 06:59, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
It's a famous picture, why isnt there something on it in wikipedia? there are reasons why this happened, you know. just google it and you'll see D e v r i t 03:26, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
Hello, I would like to add Princeton University Press' newly formed Einstein Page ( http://press.princeton.edu/einstein/) to list of external links. Thanks, Watson —Preceding unsigned comment added by Watsonwang26 ( talk • contribs) 15:37, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
Is it true that Einstein was member of German Democratic Party ??? (I heard that a lot but I haven't found any evidence) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.164.238.230 ( talk) 15:58, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
Could somebody please add an external link to Princeton University Press' newly established Einstein page.
http://press.princeton.edu/einstein/index.html
Thanks very much, Watson —Preceding unsigned comment added by Watsonwang26 ( talk • contribs) 17:49, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
John C. Huang ( talk) 02:14, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
Accoording to his article, Rabindranath Tagore is Bengali, not Indian as described in the caption beneath the picture with him and Einstein. 211.30.122.32 ( talk) 02:52, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
Ohanian, Hans C., Einstein's Mistakes: The Human Failings of Genius, W.W. Norton, 2008. Gwen Gale ( talk) 07:39, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
I don't understand the following sentences from the above section as they don't make much sense:
"Although he continued to be lauded for his work in theoretical physics, Einstein became increasingly isolated in his research, and his attempts were ultimately unsuccessful."
His attempts at what - formulating a unified field theory maybe?
"In his pursuit of a unification of the fundamental forces, he ignored some mainstream developments in physics (and vice versa), most notably the strong and weak nuclear forces, which were not well understood until many years after Einstein's death."
What does vice versa mean here - that he was ignored by some mainstream developments. First of all you can be ignored by a person but not by a development, and secondly, if his attempts were unsuccessful what was there to be ignored? Richerman ( talk) 00:29, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
I thought Einstien was very religious. I thought he also read the Bible five times. By the way, he was not Jewish. I'm agreeing with the article or whatever it was up top. P. S. I think you need to change it or "update it." Coralandstarr ( talk) 18:30, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
I have Asperger's syndrome, and taking that into account, we're pretty sure that Einstein had Asperger's as well. I know that Asperger people learn in different ways than normal people. From what I heard, I'm certain that Einstein failed arithmetic. And it seems to me that these sources written in the 2000s that say he was a top student in elementary school are done by leftists who want to rewrite history.
Let me note that it is commonly written that FDR was a great US President and that his New Deal got the US out of the Great Depression, all of which is very doubtful. We believe that hiring more people for jobs would better do the trick rather than more federal gov't intervention. We believe it was the entry into World War II that really ended the Depression.
Unless you guys have some really good reasoning why I shouldn't leave this "top student" part out, I don't think it should stay. Let's try three days, if there's no response to this, I will proceed to remove this sourced note. Marcus2 ( talk) 23:28, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
Einstein's illnesses in 1895 and 1919 seem to have been mental illnesses. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.158.207.21 ( talk) 11:46, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
On neither of the occasions mentioned did Einstein have a "nervous" illness. At the end of 1895 he obtained a medical certificate from an obliging doctor, the elder brother of his medical student friend Max Talmud, attesting he was suffering from "neurasthenic exhaustion", but this was merely a pretext to enable him to be granted permission to leave his Gymnasium in Munich and join his parents who had emigrated to Italy earlier that year (A. Fölsing, Albert Einstein (1997), p. 30). In 1917 he fell ill with a stomach ailment, later diagnosed as a duodenal ulcer, almost certainly precipitated by his failing to take sufficient care of himself since his marriage with Mileva broke down, and he lived alone while working intensely on General Relativity theory. He continued to experience stomach problems over the next two years, and was confined to bed for some weeks in 1918, but continued working on physics during this time (Fölsing, pp. 405-06; 417-18). Esterson ( talk) 20:03, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
Naturally this article needs to cover Einstein's religious views. However, should the infobox include "religious stance"? See the discussion on removing religion from the infobox for scientists. -- Johnuniq ( talk) 23:59, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
Einstein letter shows disdain for religion: Albert Einstein described belief in God as "childish superstition" and said Jews were not the chosen people, in a letter to be sold in London this week, an auctioneer said Tuesday.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/1951333/Einstein-thought-religions-were-'childish'.html http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2008/may/12/peopleinscience.religion http://blogs.nature.com/news/thegreatbeyond/2008/05/einstein_god_is_human_weakness_1.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by Babakmd ( talk • contribs) 14:25, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
Of course he was Jewish, whether he was religious in the conventional sense or not. On that general topic, I give you this story, from Groucho Marx: "I knew a fellow named Otto Kahn, who was a very rich man, and he gave a lot of money to the Metropolitan Opera House at one time. And his close friend was Marshall P. Wilder, who was a hunchback. And they were walking down Fifth Avenue, and they came to a synagogue, and Kahn turned to Wilder and he said 'Marshall, you know I used to be a Jew.' Marshall said 'Really? I used to be a hunchback.'" Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 14:29, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
Sounds racist to me.
This angle seems to be exaggerated in Wikipedia, especially in the biographies of great men. At the same time, while Einstein was for all intents and purposes not from anything any reasonable person would call a Jewish background, he was involved in early Zionist politics, and advocated some sort of ethnic identity - almost a nationalistic one. His life was also affected by racism in some ways - of course, that is a separate issue, and does not necessarily go together with anything else, though it does here. All of that can be treated in the relevant place within the biography, with whatever importance each of these things had in this or that period of his life. What we should avoid is tagging a man or claiming him for (the Hall of Fame of) a group, as opposed to describing him. In general, we should prefer descriptions - the more nuanced and adjusted to the subject of the biography, the better - to definitions, many of which are unencyclopaedic. Feketekave ( talk) 07:53, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
Quite a bit of time in the archives of this discussion page has already been spent discussing whether Einstein's status as an ethnic Jew should be mentioned in the infobox/lead/category/etc. Consensus at least emerged to have Jewish as in the relevant field of the infobox, based on (among reams of discussion) also a straw poll. Furthermore, the issue of whether Einstein should be characterized as German-born, American, Swiss, Swiss-American, Jewish, etc., in the lead has also been discussed, and the consensus to emerge from that discussion was simply to say "German-born", rather than to attempt to dissect his rather complicated nationality in the first sentence. His nation of birth is relevant in order to give context for the German pronunciation of his name. Accordingly, I have reverted one of Feketekave's edits (which also lacked an edit summary). I am considering whether to revert the rest of them. siℓℓy rabbit ( talk) 19:06, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
Per WP:BRD, the onus is one you, Feketekave, to develop consensus here rather than force your own version of the article against the previous consensus (here and abundantly discussed in the archives, which you so far have shown no sign of having read). I suggest that you start a WP:RFC rather than continuing an edit war here. If you do not come up with an agreeable phrasing for an RfC, then I will start one myself. Thanks, siℓℓy rabbit ( talk) 01:16, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
I hope we do not have an edit war here yet. I thank you for your references, and would rather you refrained from making assumptions on what I have and haven't read. See also WP:CIVIL. Please refrain from making blanket accusations of "exceptionally poor judgement" (which you have made more than once).
We seem to agree on some issues, one of them being - it seems - that this is a general topic that should be subject to a general discussion in a common place, rather than here. What would be the difference between bringing it up to RfC and bringing it up in the Village Pump? What would you think more appropriate/helpful, and why? Feketekave ( talk) 01:38, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
I am not, by the way, the same person as Babakmd above or Coralandstarr below; feel free to run a checkuser if that is what you are implying. Feketekave ( talk) —Preceding undated comment was added at 01:51, 16 January 2009 (UTC).
(To Feketekave) I agree with the assertion that categories are not binary, and I much prefer to err on the side of overcategorization than undercategorization, given that the stated purpose of categorization is to serve as a navigation aid rather than to be an absolute judgment of the article. That said, your rationale for excluding Einstein from these categories, and removing various references to his Jewish heritage from the text is that he is not Jewish enough. Above you say: "[Einstein was] not from anything any reasonable person would call a Jewish background." Well, the threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not "truth". Many reliable sources indicate that Einstein was Jewish: not religiously, but ethnically so. So both the requirements of WP:V, and what seems the weaker requirement of your reasonable person test would seem to be adequately met. Sources also show that his membership to the Jewish people significantly influenced details of his public life. Equally it influenced the more private biographical details — such as enduring anti-semiticism and the flight from Nazi Germany. Now, since the details of Einstein's ethnic heritage are clearly verifiable, including Einstein's own self-identification with the group, and they obviously played a notable role in his public and private life, I can see no reason at all not to include Einstein in these categories. siℓℓy rabbit ( talk) 13:44, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
Excuse me, but you are confusing several different things. I could self-identify as (say) Poldavian; this would not make my family Poldavian. There could be sources (such as, say, the League of Anti-Poldavians and the Lovers of Poldavianism) that might call me a Poldavian. This is different from a situation where there are sources stating that I drink coffee. At issue is whether we are going to have this sort of categorisation - I have already stated why calling it "ethnic" is ambiguous at best and fallacious at worst - and whether it makes any sense to copy other people's usage of these terms. We are not talking about facts, but rather about classification and language. Feketekave ( talk) 11:18, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
By the way - you are completely misstating my rationale. Feketekave ( talk) 11:28, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
One more thing: I agree completely that the purpose of categorisation is to serve as an aid to navigation. This is a strong argument in favour of eliminating most categories as applied to subjects of wikipedia biographies. It is extremely unlikely that somebody would learn about Einstein by going through a list of Swiss Jews (or, say Amateur violinists who lived in New Jersey). Feketekave ( talk) 11:44, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
Allow me to disagree. That is simply an article section on the different common usages of the word "Jewish" and "Jew". On other people's advice, I have started a thread at [ [12]]. That seems to be an appropriate place for a general discussion.
To sillyrabbit: I did not choose the discussion title, and, in fact, I find it supremely silly. If User:Silly rabbit believes it represents my position, then he is simply unable to read what I write.
We have no duty to categorise individuals as some sources do. There are some classifications that are not encyclopaedic: if many sources called an individual "wonderful", he would still not be called "wonderful" here. As User:Nbauman seems to indicate, this is a general issue that has been and has to be discussed. To try to solve it by WP:Verifiability is a strategy better left to silly rabbits. Feketekave ( talk) 13:00, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
I have seen a claim, on various places on the internet, and in a publication, that Einstein's last words are lost; since he said them in German and the only other person present didn't speak it. I cannot, however, find a reliable source for this. Is the statement true or false, and should it be mentioned either way? -- 70.171.186.233 ( talk) 02:51, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
In the long list of Einstein's ever-changing citizenship, there is a gap between 1896 and 1901. Does anyone know what his citizenship would have been during this period? Why the gap? Udibi ( talk) 06:49, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
So, at the end, should or shouldn't Einstein be called "Swiss-American"? Were these not his two nationalities during most of his adult life? Feketekave ( talk) 13:13, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
Deleted. Original here. -- Old Moonraker ( talk) 15:42, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
Why isn't there a mention about the famous tongue picture? 62.173.86.208 ( talk) 13:30, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
Youth and schooling:
→ nobody, not even einstein, begins his schooling in a gymnasium!
→ the gymnasium cannot have been (very) progressive, if einstein resented the school regime to the point of not finishing school.
→ ETH is the newer name (since 1911) of what was called "Eidgenössische Polytechnische Schule" ('Poly') in einsteins youth.
Marriage and family life:
→ i think it is appropriate to mention the fact, that elsa löwenthals maiden name was einstein, allthough she was only second cousin paternally. -- Ajnem ( talk) 18:31, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
"Rather than completing high school, Einstein decided to apply directly to the
Eidgenössische Polytechnische Schule (later
Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule ETH) in Zürich, Switzerland. Lacking a school certificate, he was required to take an entrance examination, which he did not pass, although he got exceptional marks in mathematics and physics. ... ...to finally enroll in 1896 in the mathematics and physics program at the Polytechnic. ... In the same year, Einstein's future wife,
Mileva Marić, also entered the Polytechnic to study mathematics and physics, as the only woman. During the next few years, Einstein and Marić's friendship developed into romance. Einstein graduated in 1900 with a diploma as a teacher for mathematics and physics."
if i'm not mistaken, both einstein and maric studied mathematics and physics. if that is so, please make the corrections.
The reason why Albert Einstein is not a featured article is because it is too long and goes too far in depth on some topics.
I would like to make Albert Einstein become a featured article again by shortening parts of it. But what sections should I start in? Any suggestions would be very helpful.
Thanks! Math Cool 10 03:17, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
I'm thankful for this article's depth. I wouldn't trim a thing. Johnlogic ( talk) 01:12, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
The problem with Einstein is that everybody wants a piece of him, so the article has accrued some information that is of little interest to most readers. The discussion of his technical work is already about as brief as it can be without becoming a distortion. Places to trim would be biographical trivia not directly bearing on his lifework and the lengthy discussion of his religious views, which could be boiled down to maybe two sentences. Editorial discretion is essential, in order to provide or link to information about specific items of notable special interest, e.g. whether Mileva contributed significantly to the theory of relativity. — DAGwyn ( talk) 15:50, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
I can not find this article to long. One clould cut down a little of the early life and his religios views. Imho this is no major problem.-- WerWil ( talk) 01:35, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
The two huge quotes under "Religious Views" should be cut or cut out. There is no justification for such whopping quotations. Myrvin ( talk) 21:38, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
This article claims Albert Einstein did not send his Nobel Prize money to his first wife, Mileva. A review of the reference page cited appears to indicate it to be a political opinion piece rather than fact based. I have read numerous accounts of Einstein's life and there appears to be considerable documentation in public records that he did, in fact, send the money as per their agreement. She used the money to purchase three apartment buildings outright. The buildings did not pay off nearly as well as she had hoped, but they did provide him with a comfortable living for the remainder of her life. In addition, their boys grew up with her, not Albert and Maric. CharmsDad ( talk) 23:03, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
... On 14 May 1904, Albert and Mileva's first son,
Hans Albert, was born in Berne, Switzerland. Their second son,
Eduard, was born in Munich Zurich on 28 July 1910.--
Ajnem (
talk)
08:57, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
you should include that he also took albanian nationality. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
212.156.173.181 (
talk)
19:05, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
This vandal should be flung out of Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.149.223.218 ( talk) 14:38, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
what did he practice? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.198.216.115 ( talk • contribs) 19:45, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
Under "Publications," the citation for "On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies" is given as being in the 17th issue of Annalen Der Physik, while it is actually published in issue 10. Velcrocookie ( talk) 22:45, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
There is an obvious error in the residency where it says Switzerland (1901-55)
BMatsuyama ( talk) 00:29, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
Isnt there a actual list? of books you can buy today ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.250.214.96 ( talk) 18:19, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
Impressive list of achievements in the intro, but shouldn't that list be somewhere in the text, and the list in the intro transmogrified into a paragraph describing his main achievements? After all: many of those items in the list are connected to each-other, f.ex. perihelion advance of Mercury (the planet! not the metal), and frame-dragging, are just corollaries of the general relativity. Therefore their mention could be subclauses or minor clauses after a main clause describing general relativity. ... said: Rursus ( bork²) 08:58, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
"At his mother's insistence, he took violin lessons starting at age six, and although he disliked them and eventually quit, he later took great pleasure in Mozart's violin sonatas."
This isn't cited.
A more correct version can be found here: http://www.oxfordtoday.ox.ac.uk/2008-09/v21n2/06.shtml as well as countless other reputable sources.
The majority of children who take lessons under their parent's "insistence" do not enjoy the lessons. This doesn't mean that Einstein quit or didn't enjoy playing. Playing and practicing are quite different. He played throughout his life, was considered to be quite good and clearly enjoyed himself.
Some sources say that his violin playing played an integral role in his ability to establish his theories. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.13.53.174 ( talk) 22:46, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
Shouldn't it be mentioned that many psychologists believe he had Asperger's Syndrome? TomCat4680 ( talk) 07:51, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
Not a content issue but a possible html syntax problem:
When using Windows XP, Internet Explorer 7, and Adobe Acrobat (both versions 6 and 8), the "printable version" of this page...
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Albert_Einstein&printable=yes
...the Adobe distiller fails and generates the text file
title=Albert_Einstein&print.log
%%[ ProductName: Distiller ]%% DejaVuSans not found, using Courier. %%[ Error: invalidfont; OffendingCommand: show ]%% Stack: (�) %%[ Flushing: rest of job (to end-of-file) will be ignored ]%% %%[ Warning: PostScript error. No PDF file produced. ] %%
All latest (v2.29) DejaVu fonts are installed, and never a problem with "printable version" to Adobe with any other page.
LBruns ( talk) 13:58, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
was there a misunderstanding in the 1905 papers I thought the first paper was amout Quanta light? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.198.216.115 ( talk) 23:07, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
EPR gets mentioned twice in the article but only in the most unillustrative way (in the intro it is just thrown out as an accomplishment, no elaboration; in the later section, it is described about its concern about non-locality, which is a very poor way of conveying what it means to Einstein). May I suggest that the intro bullet point be changed to "The EPR Paradox, a fundamental challenge to the metaphysical basis of quantum theory", and the later part be changed so as to convey that EPR is about whether or not quantum mechanics can be regarded as a "complete" theory, that is, whether it is a description of how the universe works or what our limitations for knowing it is. This was considered for many years to be a simply metaphysical question, unresolvable through experiment, but decades later Bell's theorem managed to show that aspects of it are indeed testable experimentally, and that these experiments have been carried out, and it turns out that Einstein was in fact incorrect—that the limitations of knowledge about quantum systems are inherent to the systems themselves, not simply to limitations in human knowledge. -- 140.247.242.83 ( talk) 19:33, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
On his quote about what world war 4 will be fought with, he did not say it will be fought with rocks, but sticks and stones. Please correct. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.58.161.219 ( talk) 21:44, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
Einstein is sometimes quoted by defenders of Pope Pius XII for saying that the Church was one of the only institutions that kept a voice during the national-socialist Reich. The quote is interesting because it provides insight on his views on other religions than his own, especially Christianity. [13] ADM ( talk) 08:58, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
It would add well to this article, and last time I checked Wikiquote does not have a full article on a single quote, but this is about Einstein--
72.74.112.203 (
talk)
14:43, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
Einstein's Jewish heritage was the most salient fact of his personal life outside of his career. Listing Einstein as "German-born" when he had to flee Nazi Germany at the height of his academic career does not do the subject justice and in fact is rather misleading. Even during WWI, Einstein stated "By heritage I am a Jew, by nationality Swiss, by conviction a human being and only a human being with no particular penchant for a state or national entity." —Preceding unsigned comment added by Archaeogenetics ( talk • contribs) 09:42, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
Would this satisfy folks? Bigweeboy ( talk) 15:10, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
Ok, y'all let's pick something and stick with it. If further dicsussion is needed then remove the phrase in question and we can discuss. If not, let's leave it as is and not keep flip-flopping. This would be a good justification for an editor to lock the page until a decision can be made. Varkstuff ( talk) 20:57, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
Hello fellow editors. I would like to open a friendly discussion on the External Links section. According to Wiki guidelines WP:EL external links should be kept to a minimum, ideally including only the link to an official site of the subject. We may want to trim the current list as some may be inappropriate for Wiki guidelines. We can decide together which ones to delete. Do you have any comments or initial feedback before I give more specific proposals on what I feel should be deleted? I will not remove anything without first discussing it here. :: ( talk) 12:27, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
I found listing "Ethnicity" of famous people in the fact box, along with residence and nationality, quite strange. My opinion: 1) It has nothing to do with the short biographic article. If ethnicity is somehow relevant, it could be mentioned in the article body (as it is done here). 2) Even if it has, its usage should be consistent. However, articles for Einstein fellow famous physicists (Bohr, Rutherford, Planck - to name a few) do not have the ethnicity entity). 3) The ethnicity line at the fact box should be dropped. The old and broad discussion could be found here Talk:Albert_Einstein/Archive_index#Ethnicity_field_of_infobox, but I believe the case is clear enough to make a decision without studying it in details and having it as a precedent. -- Dp074 ( talk) 12:12, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
Since Einstein is heralded as one of the smartest people to ever live (if not the smartest), I think it would be a good idea to mention his IQ somewhere, if it's known what it was. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.218.92.119 ( talk) 01:11, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
I doubt he ever took an IQ test. Did they even exist back then?-- Adam آدم ( talk) 19:36, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
The Link to Luitpold Gymnasium is wrong. Quote from the article: Albert Einstein is not an alumnus of this school.
He was on a school called "Luitpold Gymnasium" that is called now "Einstein Gymnasium". The todays "Luitpold Gymnasium" is not that one so please remove the link to that article. 138.246.7.49 ( talk) 18:11, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
After a very distasteful experience with the FA process I have abandoned work on this article. I have done a lot to it to get it up to status and if someone is interested they should be able to get it to FA status relatively quickly. Most of the remaining work is related to cleaning up and pruning down the references. I only post this here in the hopes that someone will take on the daunting challenge of navigating the hurdles and politics of the FA process. Just a heads up if you haven't been a major contributor to the article already, don't bother.-- Kumioko ( talk) 15:32, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
i was a certified nursing assistant in the 90's, i do not have the exact years however. dr. chowla, (who worked with and under Albert Einstein), was a patient there at Bethesda. The name was later changed to community care center. Dr Chowla was in his final years, and he was a patient in a very very understaffed facility, given very minimal care. He was slow on his feet, and very hard to understand, he spoke very slow and very softly. He was also a bit crippled up with what was referred to as elenphantitus, in the groin area. And as mentioned before being short staffed no one was around much to talk or help him out. One one particular day, have a bit of free time, helping him walk across the room, i asked him about his book case and hid collections of books the book case was filled with. It took a long time for it to register what he was talking about, i glanced at the books on the way by, and noticed there were several books by Albert Einstein, he kept trying to tell me he was in those books. After we got him seated again, i took up looking at some of them books, he had photographs, you could tell they were him, and of course, Albert Einstein, and there were many author signed books written to Dr. Chowla, from Albert Einstein, in fact there was a treasure trove of books and pictures and hand written signatures and notes, over a long span of time in this collection in this book case. Upon his death, no one came to collect much, and it was boxed up and put into storage, inside the facility, and some went to an outside storage aread, that i do not know of. There is a tremendous amount of knowledge, and information in the small area of Laramie, Wyoming, a terrible shame it is being lost sitting rotting in boxes somewhere around there. I have given my email address, if someone can contact me somehow, i would try and give any helpful information i might be able to give, as far as staff, and people who worked there around that time, and see if some of theses items could be retrieved, and archieved, and hopefully put in a museum somewhere.
thank you Justin Fredricks
<email removed> —Preceding unsigned comment added by Justinfordman ( talk • contribs) 06:09, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
I noticed the wikipedia article states that Roosevelt received the letter from Albert Einstein on August 2nd, 1939. This information is incorrect! The letter was finished and written on August 2nd, but Roosevelt did not receive the letter until October 11, 1939. The source referenced in the article was correct, http://www.mphpa.org/index2.php?option=com_content&do_pdf=1&id=172 but apparently misread by the author of the wikipedia article.
64.251.144.132 ( talk) 00:35, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
I made the proposed copy editing changes I referred to above, but I saved the material I replaced on my computer and can add it back if too many people lose their sangfroid over this. It seemed to me that we really need to step back with this. I got through the first 1/3 of the article with additional copy editing (as far as the section on collaboration with others), and will come back later in the week to finish. -- Auntieruth55 ( talk) 20:53, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
I fixed a couple of minor punctuation problems and mismatched verb tenses.
In this section (Paper on mass–energy equivalence) the footnote is not formatted properly. Or maybe that is the way you are formatting some of his letters? That is confusing to me.
The ethnicity thing. Perhaps a way to deal with it is not to deal with it, but to say instead in the first sentence where he was born. For example:
Albert Einstein (pronounced /ˈælbərt ˈaɪnstaɪn/; German: De-Albert Einstein.oga [ˈalbɐt ˈaɪ̯nʃtaɪ̯n] ; 14 March 1879, Ulm, Württemberg, Germany – 18 April 1955, Princeton, New Jersey, US) was
an ethnically Jewish,[1][2] German-born, theoretical physicistof the 20th centurybest known for his theories of special relativity and general relativity and his lifelong support for a Jewish homeland and the Zionist movement.
Einstein
Healso contributed to statistical mechanics, especially his treatment of Brownian motion,hisresolution of the paradox of specific heats andhisconnection of fluctuations and dissipation. Despite his reservations about its interpretation, Einstein alsomade contributionscontributed to the development of quantum mechanics and, indirectly, quantum field theory, primarily through his theoretical studies of the photon.[3]
By linking to his scientific work and to Zionism, we draw attention to the three things which shaped his life. We don't need to say 20th century, because that is self-evident. We don't need to say "German" because that is also clear from the place of birth, and the box, and you go into it in detail later. By breaking the paragraph after that point, we focus attention clearly on his major contributions and the Jewishness issue. The second paragraph of the intro then deals with additional contributions. I suggestion using the word "contributed" (or something like it), rather than "he made contributions to..." Much more active tense. If you want to add religion, put it in the box as "Agnostic"...no need to make a fuss over it. He didn't, after all!
Good article. It needs another pair of eyes to make sure it's consistently punctuated. -- Auntieruth55 ( talk) 15:36, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
This edit "condensed" the section, but the next-but-one edit, from the same contributor, deleted it in favor of a small infobox. Can this important period in Einstein's life be satisfactorily represented in an infobox? I suggest reinstating the contributor's "condensed", textual version. -- Old Moonraker ( talk) 06:49, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
As much as everyone would like to co-opt Einstein, he was first and foremost a physicist. His contributions to physics are many, but it is important to list those which are foundational. The ones listed in the intro (with the exception of capillary action) are all enormous contributions, which would justify an article on someone else, had someone else discovered them. Unfortunately, I restored this by copy and paste, so there are missing references and bold and the like. Likebox ( talk) 17:56, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
... kann Ihnen aber zu meiner grossen Freude sagen, dass ich die grosse Energie und Konsequenz Ihres Denkens aufrichtig bewundere. Es ist der erste mir zu Gesicht gekommene Versuch, die gesamte menschliche Geistesleben auf biologische Elementar-Phänomene Zurückzuführen inclusive der pathologischen Phänomene.
{{
cite journal}}
: Unknown parameter |month=
ignored (
help)
Powell… proclaims a new faith, one he calls sci/religion, that blends elements of the experimental and the mystical. The founder and greatest prophet of this religion, says Powell, is Albert Einstein, who recognized the search for truth as any inherently spiritual endeavor and who preached the doctrines of unity, simplicity, and universality.
{{
cite web}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help)
{{
citation}}
: Missing or empty |title=
(
help)
Albert Einstein ( /ˈælbərt ˈaɪnstaɪn/; German: ; 14 March 1879 – 18 April 1955) was an ethnically Jewish [1] [2], German-born theoretical physicist. He is best known for his theories of special relativity and general relativity. Einstein received the 1921 Nobel Prize in Physics "for his services to Theoretical Physics, and especially for his discovery of the law of the photoelectric effect." [3]
Einstein's many contributions to physics include:
Einstein published more than 300 scientific works and more than 150 non-scientific works. [4] [5] In 1999 Time magazine named him the Person of the Century, and in the words of a biographer, "to the scientifically literate and the public at large, Einstein is synonymous with genius." [6]
By heritage I am a Jew, by nationality Swiss, by conviction a human being and only a human being with no particular penchant for a state or national entity.
{{
cite book}}
: Check |url=
value (
help); Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors=
(
help)
{{
cite book}}
: |author=
has generic name (
help) His non-scientific works include: About Zionism: Speeches and Lectures by Professor Albert Einstein (1930), "Why War?" (1933, co-authored by
Sigmund Freud), The World As I See It (1934), Out of My Later Years (1950), and a book on science for the general reader,
The Evolution of Physics (1938, co-authored by
Leopold Infeld).
I removed the following from the Cold War era section:
I personally don't think this belongs in the article at all, since it seems not to have played a major role in Einstein's life. It certainly doesn't seem like something that should be discussed in a section largely devoted to Einstein and the Cold War. Does this really truly belong in the article? If so, is there a better place to put it? Sławomir Biały ( talk) 14:03, 17 June 2009 (UTC)