Slashdot Mirror


100 Years of Einstein

spacerabbits writes "A century after Einstein's miracle year, most people still do not understand exactly what it was he did. The Economist tries to elucidate what AE did in a recent article."

14 of 378 comments (clear)

  1. Their you go, Mr. Einstein. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Your desk is all squared away. Yep, all squaaaaaaaaaaaared away.

  2. I know this isn't a book review, but... by The_Rippa · · Score: 5, Interesting

    If you really want to get a handle on what Einstein did and what his work has influenced, I would recommend buying The Elegant Universe by Brian Green. Somehow it found it's way onto my Amazon wishlist a few years ago (I don't remember putting it there), and my mom bought it for me for xmas. I've read about half of it so far and it's amazing stuff. It's about the (super)string theory, which essentially ties together Einstein's theory of relativity and quantum physics. I can feel my brain get bigger as I read it.

    1. Re:I know this isn't a book review, but... by mOoZik · · Score: 5, Informative

      They also have the video programs on PBS, for free viewing. :)

    2. Re:I know this isn't a book review, but... by MightyMartian · · Score: 5, Insightful

      > If you really want to get a handle on what Einstein did and what his work has influenced, I
      > would recommend buying The Elegant Universe by Brian Green. Somehow it found it's way onto my
      > Amazon wishlist a few years ago (I don't remember putting it there), and my mom bought it for me for
      > xmas. I've read about half of it so far and it's amazing stuff. It's about the (super)string theory,
      > which essentially ties together Einstein's theory of relativity and quantum physics. I can feel my
      > brain get bigger as I read it.

      And I would recommend that you also take what Green says about string theory with a grain of salt. While he's a good scientist, he like all string theorists, tend to paste over the cracks in string theory. There is no experimental evidence to support string theory, at the moment it just isn't science. He also tends to handwave away difficulties with multiple theories. He is clearly biased towards string theory, and at points I'd say unreasonably biased.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    3. Re:I know this isn't a book review, but... by albn · · Score: 5, Interesting

      His theories have been the cornerstone of modern Physics, but he is not the only one that has contributed greatly in this field.

      Some notables that come to mind are James Clerk Maxwell for his eletromegnetism and electricity, Tullio Levi Civita for his Absolute Differential Calculus, Wolfgang Pauli, Max Born, and many others.

      The universe is a very interesting place that still holds many secrets that we try to unlock with invariants, tensor fields on manifolds, experiments with atom smashers, detecting gravity waves, metrics, Jacobians, etc.... but the bottom line is, no matter what we discover or think is out there, there will always be more questions than answers.

      Thank you Albert, you have helped open the door to the long question you had with a unified field theory. As with Pauli say himself the solution to a unified field theory is akin to a Titian painting that is still a blank canvas.

      --
      Some call me Howie Feltersnatch
  3. Relativity In Words of Four Letters or Less by The_Rippa · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Albert Einstein's Theory of Relativity

    In Words of Four Letters or Less

    [ 0 ]

    So, have a seat. Put your feet up. This may take some time. Can I get you some tea? Earl Grey? You got it.

    Okay. How do I want to do this? He did so much. It's hard to just dive in. You know? You pick a spot to go from, but soon you have to back up and and go over this or that item, and you get done with that only to see that you have to back up some more. So if you feel like I'm off to the side of the tale half the time, well, this is why. Just bear with me, and we'll get to the end in good time. Okay?

    Okay. Let's see....

    [ I ]

    Say you woke up one day and your bed was gone. Your room, too. Gone. It's all gone. You wake up in an inky void. Not even a star. Okay, yes, it's a dumb idea, but just go with it. Now say you want to know if you move or not. Are you held fast in one spot? Or do you, say, list off to the left some? What I want to ask you is: Can you find out? Hell no. You can see that, sure. You don't need me to tell you. To move, you have to move to or away from ... well, from what? You'd have to say that you don't even get to use a word like "move" when you are the only body in that void. Sure. Okay.

    Now, let's add the bed back. Your bed is with you in the void. But not for long -- it goes away from you. You don't have any way to get it back, so you just let it go. But so now we have a body in the void with you. So does the bed move, or do you move? Or both? Well, you can see as well as I that it can go any way you like. Flip a coin. Who's to say? It's best to just say that you move away from the bed, and that the bed goes away from you. No one can say who's held fast and who isn't.

    Now, if I took the bed back but gave you the sun -- just you and the sun in the void, now -- I'll bet you'd say that the sun is so big, next to you, that odds are you move and not the sun. It's easy to move a body like ours, and not so easy to kick a sun to and fro. But that isn't the way to see it. Just like with the bed, no one can say who's held fast.

    In a word, you can't find any one true "at rest". Izzy was the one who told us that. Izzy said that you can't tell if you move or are at rest at any time. You can say that you go and all else is at rest, or you can say that you are at rest and all else goes. It all adds up the same both ways. So we all knew that much from way back when.

    Aha, but now wait! The sun puts off rays! So: why not look at how fast the rays go past you? From that you'd see how fast you move, yes? For you see, rays move just the same if what puts them off is held fast or not. (Make a note of that, now.) Izzy had no way to know that, back then, but it's true. Rays all move the same. We call how fast that is: c. So, you can see how fast the rays go by you, and how far off that is from c will tell you how fast you move! Hell, you don't even need the sun for that. You can just have a lamp with you -- the one by your bed that you use to read by. You can have that lamp in your hand, and see how fast the rays go by you when you turn it on. The lamp will move with you, but the rays will move at c. You will see the rays move a bit more or less than c, and that will be how fast you move. An open-and-shut case, yes?

    Well, and so we went to test this idea out. Hey, you don't need to be in a void to do this test. We move all the time, even as we sit here. We spin, in fact. So they shot some rays off and took note of how fast they went east, and how fast they went west, and so on. Well, what do you know? The rays went just as fast both ways. All ways, in fact. They all went at c, just the same. Not an iota more or less.

    To say that we were less than glad to find that out is to be kind. It blew the mind, is more like it. "What is up with that?" we said. And here is when old Al came in.

    [ II ]

    Old Al, he came out the blue and said, "Not only do rays move at c if what puts them out is held fast or not: they move at

    1. Re:Relativity In Words of Four Letters or Less by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      For a bunch of four-letter-words, "fuck" and "shit" are used very sparsely. Please revise. One has certain expectations, as I'm sure you understand.

  4. Speaking of people understanding by bradleyland · · Score: 5, Funny

    I asked 7 people in my office what elucidate meant. Only one person knew, some shrugged, and one asked me if that was really a word *sigh*

  5. Another good book and thoughts by Manan+Shah · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Another good book is 'Relativity and Common Sense'. It explains the logical progression from Newton to Einstein. It starts off with Gravity, newtonian principles and then starts adding twists. However, I think that quantom mechanics probably was a bigger discovery than Einstein. The concept of chance at the atomic level was a revelation, and even Einstein had trouble accepting it. However, we can only hope that within our lifetime, someone will succeed in crafting the 'THeory of Everything' which combines theory of large objects such as Planets, galaxies of Einstein with the theory of small things such as atoms of quantam mechanics. Maybe M (string theory) is the answer, maybe not. But these are exciting times we live in!

  6. having taken quantum mechanics courses... by eobanb · · Score: 5, Interesting

    ...I can certainly appreciate Einstein's sheer genius, particularly when it came to relativity. It was Einstein who postulated that, essentially, absolutely everything was relative. You hear all the examples about going around the sun in a spaceship really fast, or the twins paradox, but it doesn't really just stop there. There are all kinds of weird things that happen when you go really fast; for example, your size changes. If I'm driving my car really really fast (and of course, we're talking close to the speed of light), my vehicle actually becomes shorter. Then as I slow down, it stretches out again. At the beginning of the 20th century, no doubt what a lot of Einstein proposed sounded like sheer madness.

    In his later years, though, Einstein became increasingly conservative and very resistant to the idea of uncertainty, formulated by Bohr and Heisenberg. Einstein, from a generation of research before these two scientists, was still a determinist; he believed that you could not only discover both the position and velocity (speed and direction) of a particle, but that if you knew all such properties of all particles, you could accurately predict the state of things far in the future. I became disappointed with Einstein when I learned that, in the late 30s and 40s, even when faced with overwhelming evidence to support the ontic and epistemic uncertainty principles, Einstein tried lots of clever thought experiments to prove them wrong, even though they all relied on knowing more than one mutually incompatible property at once. I think Einstein contributed a lot, but he also made a lot of mistakes later in his life.

    --

    Take off every sig. For great justice.

  7. General Theory of Relativity in two lines by fromme · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Space tells matter how to move. Matter tells space how to curve.

    The best definition I've found till date. If you can wrap your head around that, you're in the clear!

  8. Re:Einstein hated? by parker9 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    it's not that physicists hate Einstein, it's more they hate how people view Einstein. it's mostly because Einstein became the poster-boy for the media about modern physics. as we know, the media tends to simplify things and so it suggests that Einstein did relativity, photoelectric effect, etc. by himself.

    given that Newton said he had seen far only because he stood on the shoulders of giants, Einstein is even more indebted to others before and during his time.

    look, i'm not saying that he wasn't a remarkable physicist- when i read some of his papers, i do feel like i'm reading something that's very close to 'god'- so clear, so elegant, so beautiful.

    yes, i am a physicist. and yes, i do find myself using Einstein's results. i'm glad when it happens, because i *feel* i'm close to reality.

  9. Note: "Herb" actually refers to Hermann Minkowski. by stkpogo · · Score: 5, Informative

    Note: "Herb" actually refers to Hermann Minkowski. (And "Izzy" and "Ari" are, of course, Isaac Newton and Aristotle.)
    http://www.muppetlabs.com/~breadbox/txt/al.html

  10. Patent Clerk?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny
    But wait, Einstein started out as a patent clerk. Aren't we supposed to hate him for that?

    I'm so confused......