What Was the Albert Einstein Debate of 2004?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the "Albert Einstein Debate of 2004," a topic assigned for a paper by a student. Participants express confusion regarding the specifics of this debate, its relevance, and the lack of available information on it. The conversation touches on various interpretations and potential connections to Einstein's theories and events from 2004.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Homework-related
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses uncertainty about the topic, stating they cannot find relevant information and questioning the accuracy of the assignment.
  • Another participant suggests that the debate might relate to gravitational effects and whether they align with Einstein's theories, referencing a NASA article.
  • Some participants speculate that the debate could involve conflicts between General Relativity (GR) and Quantum Mechanics (QM), or other scientific discussions from 2004.
  • Concerns are raised about the definition of "debate" in a scientific context, with one participant questioning if the topic is being mischaracterized.
  • Links to various articles and resources are shared, although some participants critique the validity of certain sources.
  • There is a suggestion to clarify the assignment with the teacher, as the topic seems vague and potentially misinterpreted.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree that there is confusion surrounding the topic and its specifics. Multiple competing views about what the debate could entail remain unresolved, with no consensus on the nature of the "Albert Einstein Debate of 2004."

Contextual Notes

Participants express uncertainty about the assignment's requirements and the historical context of the debate. There are references to various interpretations of what the debate might involve, but no definitive conclusions are reached.

musashi
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
Yeah i have to write a 20 page paper on the Albert Einstein debate of 2004 in january sometime. I can't find anything about it I am currently a senior and am not a big math/physics person so if anyone has any information about it could you please help me out thank you.
-Justin
 
Physics news on Phys.org
20 pages godspeed.
 
do u know anything about it? please lol
 
musashi said:
Yeah i have to write a 20 page paper on the Albert Einstein debate of 2004 in january sometime. I can't find anything about it I am currently a senior and am not a big math/physics person so if anyone has any information about it could you please help me out thank you.
-Justin

There was an Albert Einstein debate in 2004? And I missed it??! Drat!

What were they debating? His hairdo?

Zz.
 
well i don't know that's the topic that my teacher had given it on. I have no idea what she ment by it. Thats the exact word for word topic that paper says.
 
I think you should go back and insist on clarification from her. I wasn't able to google up anything relevant.
 
musashi said:
well i don't know that's the topic that my teacher had given it on. I have no idea what she ment by it. Thats the exact word for word topic that paper says.

Is it completely taboo to even ask her what she meant by the "Albert Einstein Debate of 2004"?

Zz.
 
She said we have to figure everything out on our own. I am trying to write my outline now so i can start writing tommorow. But yeah i can't find jack on it.
 
musashi said:
She said we have to figure everything out on our own. I am trying to write my outline now so i can start writing tommorow. But yeah i can't find jack on it.

BTW, it is NOT nice to post your question to more than one part of PF. That's a no-no if you read PF rules.

Zz.
 
  • #10
im really sorry sir, i don't know I am just kinda going insane over this whole paper. maybe she didnt mean 2004 i don't know I am sorry though honestly. I just wish i could find some help.
 
  • #11
musashi said:
im really sorry sir, i don't know I am just kinda going insane over this whole paper. maybe she didnt mean 2004 i don't know I am sorry though honestly. I just wish i could find some help.

Well, I do hope someone can. I think I'm pretty up-to-date on the general going-ons in physics, and it would certainly be unusual if I missed something like this. However, I have never heard of this "Einstein Debate of 2004". Maybe it's something I missed and someone else here may have heard of it. In any case, I strongly suggest going to your teacher again and double-check if the topic is accurate, especially with the year.

In one of the recent entries in my Journal on here, there is a link to the Albert Einstein Archive. You may want to look at that.

Zz.
 
  • #12
I read a good book about him actually. Its called Einstiend and Newton by some Canadian publishing company. It was an interesting story. How he convinced the president to do nuclear research, he had a daughter, but she was sent away. He divorced the fist time, but married one of his cousins, I think. Maybe a 2nd cousin.
 
  • #13
http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2004/apr/HQ_04109_gravityPB.html
this is what my friend said it was most likely based on he is a physics major at u Of i urbana he said he thought he read ana rticle about it.
"it was about how the spinning of the Earth warps the gravitational field"
in simplified terms i think that means
I think it was whether gravitational effects were according to what Einstein said or not. But I am not sure can anyone verify and think that's maybe what my teacher is talking about?
 
  • #14
musashi said:
http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2004/apr/HQ_04109_gravityPB.html
this is what my friend said it was most likely based on he is a physics major at u Of i urbana he said he thought he read ana rticle about it.
"it was about how the spinning of the Earth warps the gravitational field"
in simplified terms i think that means
I think it was whether gravitational effects were according to what Einstein said or not. But I am not sure can anyone verify and think that's maybe what my teacher is talking about?

But you said "the Albert Einstein DEBATE of 2004". This is not a "debate", is it? A debate, at least to me, is a bunch of people arguing about issues. Didn't you watch any of the political debates from the last election?

If this is REALLY what your teacher meant, then this is a very strange way of defining what a "debate" is. Besides, what makes you think that THIS is the only thing in 2004 that is connected to Einstein?

Zz.
 
  • #15
i don't know i know what a debate is I am a huge political science freak. but like, a debate in science could be testing if something worked this all i can think of at least i mean unless someone else has a better idea this is what i have to go with on my outline at least. I will turn my outline into her and maybe she will yell at me for being completely wrong, or she wont. and like i said I am not sure if this is the only thing that is connect with 04 and einstein I am just going to have to go with it. I've searched the internet up and down.
 
Last edited:
  • #16
a debate in science is zapperz and mines discussion of circular motion :smile: baseball bats anyone? :-p
 
  • #17
yeah science... einstein of 2004 ugh :confused: :confused: there's a reason I am going into political science in college :D
 
  • #18
Einstein GR maybe you are supose to talk about conflict between GR and QM or at least you could and draw it back to say string theory... filler is nice for 20 pages.
 
  • #23
I would assume the question is really " What arguments are going on for/against Einstein's theory CURRENTLY ? " !?

A very new website that I came across yesterday may help a bit - http://www.new-science-theory.com
 
  • #24
GrimDad said:
I would assume the question is really " What arguments are going on for/against Einstein's theory CURRENTLY ? " !?

A very new website that I came across yesterday may help a bit - http://www.new-science-theory.com

No, this site does NOT help! Please do NOT feed quackeries in here. There are legitimate and serious scientific studies of physics. This is NOT one of them.

Zz.
 
  • #25
I will assume that you are joking in saying that Einstein and Newton are not legitimate physics !
 
  • #26
GrimDad said:
I will assume that you are joking in saying that Einstein and Newton are not legitimate physics !

Just because a website invokes the names of these two, and purported to describe their work, does not mean it is legitimate. Don't believe me? Check out Crank Dot Net.

Considering the wealth of information available on legitimate sites, AND, the fact that there are tons and tons of peer-review journals out there, why would anyone want to use an unverfied website as a source of information?

Zz.
 
  • #27
You are certainly right ZapperZ that there are good established websites dealing with physics theory, and I did quote what I said is a new website.

New websites are not established and may be good or bad. So anybody wanting to use a new website needs to study it closely first to decide which type it really is.

I have had lots of amusing times looking at many crank science websites - but it does not put me off looking at new sites - and the new site I quoted is good on the basics of physics theory history but not much else maybe for now at least.

You denounced the new website very fast indeed, suggesting that you had maybe not studied it closely first ?
 
  • #28
GrimDad said:
You denounced the new website very fast indeed, suggesting that you had maybe not studied it closely first ?

When a website starts off by saying

"The last 50 years has maybe seen no significant new science theory published, though I have been sitting on a new science theory for the last 40 years developed after the first BSc degree I took... But being satisfied that my new science theory is a major advance, I am now preparing this website to hopefully publish it soon."

.. all the warning bells should go off immediately. No self-respecting physicist would EVER claim that his/her idea is "a major advance" in anything. It is up to the rest of the experts in the fields to make such proclaimation. Secondly, this person is preparing the website to "publish it soon"?! Since when is major advancement in physics solely done on websites and not in peer-reviewed journals?

This and many other symptoms of quackeries simply based on a quick glance are sufficient for me to draw my own conclusions. And I don't remember when the last time I've been wrong on my impression of quack websites. Again, I do not see a value in recommending such unverified sites when a lot of other legitimate ones are available, and especially if a student is going to use these things for class work.

Zz.
 
  • #29
Since you conclude that any major idea originating from the web must be quackery, it seems that you did not need even your 'quick glance' at the website ZapperZ !?

Of course that site might publish some rubbish soon (and if so, you will have guessed right), but for now it has only good physics theory history. School students are no doubt best advised to stick with schoolbooks, as school teachers expect, but degree students should chiefly use their own brains and anything they feel helps that (and something better than a 'quick glance' preferably) ?!
 
  • #30
GrimDad said:
Since you conclude that any major idea originating from the web must be quackery, it seems that you did not need even your 'quick glance' at the website ZapperZ !?

I haven't been proven wrong so far. In fact, I have continually make the assertion that for an idea or discovery (at least within the past century or so) to make any significant impact on the advancement of physics, it MUST first and foremost appear in a peer-reviwed journal. I have made such an assertion on various online discussion area for the better part of 10 years, and so far, there has been nothing to contradict that. Zilch! This one won't either!

Of course that site might publish some rubbish soon (and if so, you will have guessed right), but for now it has only good physics theory history. School students are no doubt best advised to stick with schoolbooks, as school teachers expect, but degree students should chiefly use their own brains and anything they feel helps that (and something better than a 'quick glance' preferably) ?!

But how are they to know that what's legitimate and what isn't from there? The fact that they ARE looking for information directly means that they do NOT know which is which. Are you telling me that when you read the piece on Einstein from this website, you saw NOTHING wrong? I mean, just look at this piece of "gem"

"Though signals were central to Einstein's reasoning, he basically took light and electromagnetic signals as accidental emissions from bodies that his theory had doing nothing substantial in the universe except happen to inform observers."

I mean, come on! It's bad enough that a student in trying to find some information to learn from, it is worse if the sentence makes incohrent statement about Einstein and his "reasoning". You do not see a problem with a student looking at this rather than looking at the Albert Einstein archive, or his biography?

I can pick on many other inaccuracies off that site. Anyone who thinks this site is a valid source of info deserves whatever misinformation that comes along with the ride. So good luck!

Zz.
 

Similar threads

Struggle learning fluid mechanics
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Schrodinger Equation Research Question
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Some lines from the book "Ideas and Opnions" by Albert Einstein
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Can Einstein's Equations Enable Time Travel?
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
High School Why Albert Einstein's Original Concept for a Black Hole?
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
What Are the Most Controversial Topics in Biology Today?
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
Graduate What Do These Famous Quotes Reveal About the Minds of Great Scientists?
  • · Replies 204 ·
7
Replies
204
Views
42K
What Are My Chances of Being Accepted into an REU Program for Math?
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
10K
Graduate Research -- "Ziemlich Frech : Einstein versus Nernst"
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Other Name omitted from Professor's research paper- What should I do?
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
6K