sci.physics.relativity

"Juan R. González-Álvarez" wrote in message
news:fp4gfs$osu$1@...
> harry wrote on Fri, 15 Feb 2008 17:07:27 +0100:
>
>> "Juan R. Gonzlez-lvarez" wrote in message
>> news:fp42me$ap3$1@...
>>> sal wrote on Fri, 15 Feb 2008 04:15:14 +0000:
>>>
>>>> On Fri, 15 Feb 2008 03:53:40 +0000, Androcles wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> This paper is occasionally cited as containing most of the content of
>>>> Einstein's 1905 electrodynamics paper, which, it is sometimes claimed,
>>>> he plagiarized from Poincar.
>>
>> Nice to see that paper in English! :-)
>>
>>> One of reasons which Einstein has been acused of plagiarism is because
>>> Einstein said not the truth when affirmed several times "I did not know
>>> Poincare work before 1905". We know from several sources (including
>>> Einstein colleagues at Bern) that Einstein read Poincar works *before*
>>> 1905.
>>
>> When and where did he show such a general amnesia? Usually he was
>> smarter than that and only claimed that at the time he was not familiar
>> with Lorentz's 1904 paper (which I believe to be true), without
>> mentioning Poincare at all.
>
> In the famous letter to Carl Seelig:
>
> {BLOCKQUOTE
> There is no doubt, if we look back to the development of the Relativity
> theory, special Relativity was about to be discovered in 1905. Lorentz
> already noticed that the transformations (named Lorentz transformations)
> were essential in the Maxwell theory and Poincaré had gone even further.
> At that time I only knew Lorentz work of 1895, but I knew neither Lorentz
> nor Poincaré further work. This is why I can say that my work of 1905 was
> independent.
> }

I'm afraid that you are right, I see no other way of interpreting that than
claiming that in 1905 he did not know Poincare's work of after 1895.

Harald

> Einstein's friend Maurice Solovine confirmed they both read and discuss
> Poincare in Bern around 1904, kepting them "breathless for weeks on
> end." [1]
>
> Even a pro-Einstein like J. Stachel recognizes Einstein version of the
> history cannot be trusted (becasue inconsistency) [2]:
>
> {BLOCKQUOTE
> We do have a number of later historical remarks by Einstein himself,
> sometimes transmitted by others (Wertheimer, Reiser-Kayser, Shankland,
> Ishiwara, for example), which raise many problems of authenticity and
> accuracy; and some very late Einstein letters, answering questions such
> as whether he had prior knowledge of the Michelson-Morley experiment,
> what works by Lorentz he had read, the influence of Poincaré, Mach, Hume,
> etc., on his ideas; Einstein's replies are not always self-consistent, it
> must be noted.
> }
>
>> See also: /home/kmath305/
>>
>> Regards,
>> Harald
>
>
> [1] /template/AssetDetail/assetid/49611?
> &print=yes
>
> [2] /history/einstein/
>
> --
> I follow /en/miscellaneouszone/