How Einstein Plagiarized Poincare

In 1902, in "La Science et l'hypothese", Henri Poincare, in order to justify non-Euclidean geometries, presented a parabole. Bidimensional creatures live on a disk. The disk is heated under its center so that the temperature is high at the center and decreases towards the periphery. The creatures use rigid measuring rods in order to determine the geometry of their world. They know nothing about the heater and accordingly discover that the ratio of the circumference and the diameter is greater than pi. The creatures conclude that Euclidean geometry cannot be true on the disk.

In Chapter 23 in his "Relativity" Albert Einstein, in order to justify non-Euclidean geometries, presented a parabole. An observer lives on a rotating disk; there is also a Galilean system K which is not rotating. The observer on the rotating disk uses rigid measuring rods in order to determine the geometry of his world. He discovers that the ratio of the circumference and the diameter is greater than pi. The observer concludes that Euclidean geometry cannot be true on the disk.

Everything is perfect up until now and yet the Plagiarist feels there is a problem. He has "calculated" the ratio of the circumference and the diameter by using Lorentz transformations (in fact, he has just copied Poincare's conclusion although the two cases are by no means analogous) but those transformations are invalid on the rotating disc. The Plagiarist never loses heart - from now on the ratio of the circumference of the rotating disk and the diameter will be greater than pi even as measured by an observer in the non-rotating system K. In other words, the observer in the Galilean system K should measure the rotating periphery to be longer by a factor of gamma than a non-rotating periphery. The only inconvenience is that, if the linear speed of the periphery approaches c=300000km/s, gamma approaches infinity and the non-rotating observer should measure the period to be approaching infinity as well. This would be a tragedy in another world but in Einstein's zombie world this is rather a triumph.

Pentcho Valev

You know, I'm not overestimating the Einstein's desert. After all, the Poincare's aether model of relativity is much more pluralistic and definitely it would lead in more effective progress in field theory development later. It's evident, without Einstein, the relativity theory would be postulated just in few years, maybe months later by Poincare or Hilbert. The true is, young Einstein was very ambitious and assertive man, not very empathetic, maybe even insusceptible personality with autistic dispositions.

The frontiers always utilize the ideas from its neighborhood extensively, I'm compiling the informations from the web in most cases, too - just the recursive wave equation idea is solely mine. I believe, the fundamental ideas of Einstein were quite private too, as the Einstein has a very good physical feeling, incomparable with those of Poincare or Hilbert. Furthermore, the Einstein has deep and bright insights even in concurrent theories, like the quantum theory (the Bose-Einstein condensate prediction, as an example). Dr. Einstein was quite renaissance far-seeing personality with good math background in proper ratio with physical sense of reality.

http://www.bartleby.com/173/23.html

Well 1) Poincare was not making a model of space-time but just a curved space which appeared flat to the casual observer. There were no "forces" or time effects in Poincare's model. 2) Einstein throughout is using a physical model, while Poincare is making a mathematical argument about geometry. In fact, Poincare came close to beating Einstein to SR but Poincare could not abandon Galiean concepts of simultanity.

http://www.straightdope.com/columns/041224.html

(emphasis added)

Once again, I ask, why do you care? Did Einstein rape your grandmother? Did Einstein push communists to power ousting your once great and noble family? Did Einstein sabotage your perpetual motion machine idea? If, as many have suggested, some people were close to beating Einstein to SR and possibly GR, then why do you hold it against him that he got there first? And if SR and/or GR is worthless, as you say in other posts, then why would it possibly matter if he did steal it outright?

The historical record is a record and often people will discover ideas independently. The record is clear, noone put all of SR together prior to Einstein's 1905 paper. In many other cases the co-discoverers are cited together even when they didn't work together, but SR is not one of those cases.

Are you a plagiarist by not citing Christopher Jon Bjerknes?

And furthermore, in the physics community it is known who else did valuable work on special relativity.......the Lorentz transformations were derived by Lorentz, however Einstein had a much better physical interpretation of the equations. People know that Poincare was important, but it is also thought that Poincare was not willing to publish such a radical idea in fear that his career reputation might be tarnished. This is a common thing to happen to academics in the later stages of their career. Also, we know that Minkowski contributated greatly to the current mathematical formulation of the theory, as can be noted by Minkowski Space-time. If Einstein is given all of the credit, how come the mathematics in SR aren't named after him?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hermann_Minkowski

does not caunt any more
past is past
do we have some good ideas to go on with Einstein - Poincare work
or will will discuss about who was first and who second because we do not have any idea to go on !!!??