What Was the Albert Einstein Debate of 2004?

[GrimDad]

ZapperZ you are of course right that science now is entirely monopolised by the journals and has been for some years.

But Einstein and much other major physics was not in journals, and some would say that the period of journal science has largely been a period of insubstantial science though they may well be unconnected.

I do feel that the web will sometime take over - one piece of major science launched on it successfully would kill off the journals, though I have no idea when. I will continue to watch new science websites and science web news feeds.

 

[ZapperZ]

But Einstein and much other major physics was not in journals, ...

Excuse me? Einstein "was not in journals"?! Where did you think all of his 1905 papers appeared? On bathroom walls?

I do feel that the web will sometime take over - one piece of major science launched on it successfully would kill off the journals, though I have no idea when. I will continue to watch new science websites and science web news feeds.

I have been on the "net for more than 10 years. I've seen proclaimation like this, especially on the Usenet, for at least that long. These misguided individuals (who barely have even seen enough science journals to know the difference between those and supermarket tabloids) were wrong then. And you'll pardon my skepticism of your "feelings", but considering that you do not even see anything wrong out of that webpage that you even recommeneded, you'll understand that I do not put much emphasis on your prophecy.

Zz.

P.S. I noticed you didn't even attempt to defend my attack on the accuracy of that site.

 

[Gonzolo]

But Einstein and much other major physics was not in journals, and some would say that the period of journal science has largely been a period of insubstantial science though they may well be unconnected.

Try not to mix what you know with what you want to believe. Whoever says that "the period of journal science..." is quite out of touch with reality. These guys below have been publishing journals for practically all that period. And this is only the English language. Incidently, some of Einstein's work is sitting on my bookshelf, and yes it is in paper form.

History of science
The Royal Society (of London) has a huge archive of science history material dating back to 1660. The archive includes material from historically significant events such as the early experiments to demonstrate Newton's Law of Gravity and Harvey's theories of circulation, as well as the drawings that Charles Darwin produced while he was developing the theory of evolution

 

[GrimDad]

Yes well I have much of Einstein's work sitting on my PC, much not from journals - available on the web at http://Alberteinstein.info/

 

[ZapperZ]

Yes well I have much of Einstein's work sitting on my PC, much not from journals - available on the web at http://Alberteinstein.info/

So? A lot of it can be found at the Albert Einstein archive online too!

You seem to think that "journals" means "paper magazine". Unless you are waaaaaay behind in the times, almost every scientific journals are available online. This isn't the point! The point being that EVERY ideas and discovery that has made an impact in physics MUST first appear in a peer-reviewed journal. The "Einstein's work" that's "sitting" on your PC is the result of his published work in such journals! If it wasn't peer-reviewed, no one can tell if it is legitimate or even worth looking at. We certainly could not go by your judgement - just look at the type of websites that you are recommending for these kids to read!

Zz.

 

[HallsofIvy]

GrimDad: I went to the web-site you give. They divide Einstein's manuscripts into two kinds: "published" and "unpublished". By far the greater number are "published". (And the "unpublished" appear to be summaries of his published work for classes and seminars). I don't know how that website could lead you to believe "But Einstein and much other major physics was not in journals".

 

[MathematicalPhysicist]

perhaps the teacher reffered to the debate which was held in ireland with stephen hawking, this one:
http://www.dcu.ie/~nolanb/gr17.htm

 

[GrimDad]

For Einstein and for others 'published' is not always 'published in journals' - you must have heard of books and other publications ? And anything can be peer-reviewed, including even websites !

 

[ZapperZ]

For Einstein and for others 'published' is not always 'published in journals' - you must have heard of books and other publications ? And anything can be peer-reviewed, including even websites !

"Published" in science ALWAYS means "published in a peer-reviewed journal". A "book" publication is always based on work already published in such journals. You are fooling yourself if you think those books and "other publications" that you cited were NOT based on work that already appeared in peer-reviewed journals. Again, all you need to do is show me one such report that has NEVER appeared in a peer-reviewed journal that has made an impact in advancing the body of knowledge in physics. All you have managed to do is throw out all these generalization without substance.

Also, please show me a "website" that is "peer-reviewed". I'm assuming that you do not mean the peer-reviewed journals websites themselves, because it appears that you somehow still think "journals" means "physical paper journals" (how archaic!).

Zz.

 

[GrimDad]

This is nicely answered by that history of science website which you would do well to give much more than a 'quick glance' - as you really need some history of science it seems - http://www.new-science-theory.com/ ?

 

[ZapperZ]

This is nicely answered by that history of science website which you would do well to give much more than a 'quick glance' - as you really need some history of science it seems - http://www.new-science-theory.com/ ?

Maybe you should read a real "history of science" text rather than use this website as your primary source of informaton. After all, we have already established that you cannot tell the difference when you are reading legitimate information from crap.

Zz.

P.S. Again, as before, when confronted with my questions asking for evidence to support ANY of your claims, you wither away with even attempting to answer them. I am still waiting for this "peer-reviewed websites" of yours.

 

[polyb]

musashi and anyone else who cares,

Perhaps your teacher was referring to the article that was recently published by a physicist claiming that perhaps Einstein plagiarised Hilbert in his formulations of GR. Here is the link to the article at the Register UK:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/11/15/einstein_relativity/

Here is the link to the write up:

http://www.physics.unr.edu/faculty/winterberg/Hilbert-Einstein.pdf

I hope this gives you something to go by, because it is the only thing that looks a like a debate to me. My only other advice is to double space and use large fonts, that should fill 20 pages quickly! Good luck!

 

[kuba]

Well guys, I see that this discussion has completely mised OPs post.

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.​

Well then I figure you should get a roll of toilet paper, cut it into nice strips, tape them together and cut to the size of letter sheets, nicely bind 20 of them and submit it to her. I suggest you poop on each page too. I'm dead serious.

If she shows any signs of astonishment, you can say that you figured out she meant bull****, and dissertated accordingly.

My goodness, what a #&@!$ teacher is she? "Figure everything out on your own" Yay sure. And then she has the freedom to fail everyone saying that "well, you didn't figure out what I wanted you to figure out". And fail whole class just because she had a period or something.

Drop the course if you can, or bring that issue up the chain of command (school/department principal?).