Albert Einstein (1879–1955)

I will never quite understand the keenness for what Einstein calls the "highly-centralized productive apparatus". Provided by the state to a narcicisstic adopter, I have my own reasons for suspicion of centralised, distant government (as opposed to local community) involving itself in the trajectory of one's life. But priorities may shift as and when we exit Veblen & Einstein's "predatory phase" of human society: capitalist, nationalist, self-interested. We can only hope Hegel was right at show more least about our progressing towards something better than today, or, better still, that we might reject his antirevolutionary tilt and find within ourselves the strength to overcome where we are. Workers rise up! Protect your land, your communities, your freedom, from governments and corporations alike!

Oh, nor will I ever quite get the--I think capitalist brainwash--portrayal of work as dignity. (I do half jest.) Nonetheless. Sing it, Bruder Einstein! show less

This year is the centennial of the publication of Einstein's general theory of relativity. I got my hands on the Pi Press edition, which was published 10 years ago (coinciding with the centennial of the special theory of relativity.) Yesterday, the New Horizons spacecraft flew past Pluto, sending huge volumes of information back to Earth - and the day before, CERN announced that the LHC has found proof of the existence of the pentaquark. Science continues to reach new frontiers, though show more nothing that can compete with the relativity revolution ushered in by Einstein a century ago.

This edition has an introduction by Roger Penrose which focuses on Einstein's theories in the history of science – where he argues (and he’s certainly not alone about that) that the special theory of relativity had in fact long been in the works in 1905 and would have been formulated eventually also if there had been no Einstein. But it is the general theory of relativity that is Einstein’s unique contribution, and which proved to be so thoroughly revolutionary.
The book also includes an essay by David C. Cassidy titled "The Cultural Legacy of the Relativity Theory" which examines the impact of the theory outside of physics. This proved to be an interesting read and for me it contained lots of new information. On the reception of the theory among the general public he writes: "Relativity was not just another important new theory. It profoundly challenged the common understanding of everyday physical concepts — space, time, mass, simultaneity.(...) Even the very name "theory of relativity," coming after the rise of Darwin's theory of evolution, seemed to confirm the decline of old absolute values and beliefs, together with the old world order, and the triumph of a universal relativism. Einstein, of course, objected to such interpretations. Relativity theory had nothing to do with relativism, he insisted. In fact, he had first called it the "theory of invariants," for its emphasis on the unchanging character of natural laws within different reference frames."
Though Einstein’s objections were indeed to the point, they also regrettably didn’t help much. It would seem that the real problem was - and still is - the widening gap between specialists and non-specialists; between scientists and the general public.

My first read of Einstein’s Relativity contained only his own text as published in 1916. After the read I didn’t really feel a whole lot wiser, but rereading Einstein's text was definitely useful. It also helped that this time I knew the disposition of the text and could attack it proceed with more patience. I also identified what had hampered me so much on the first read: that pesky Lorentz transformation! It wasn't quite as daunting this time around. Still, in comparison Gaussian coordinates is a piece of cake. So when Einstein states the general principle of relativity as "All Gaussian coordinate systems are essentially equivalent for the formulation of the general laws of nature," I feel rather relieved that I can say ok I get that - somehow. Stephen Hawking writes in A Brief History of Time that "seventy years ago, if [Arthur] Eddington is to be believed, only two people understood the general theory of relativity." Which really brightened my day -- if only for a split second however, since he goes on to say: "Nowadays tens of thousands of university graduates do, and many millions of people are at least familiar with the idea." I liked that he used the term "familiar", I feel it applies to me as well.

Also included in this edition is a commentary by Robert Geroch which provides some useful elucidations expanding on the explanations Einstein uses in the various chapters. Einstein’s own examples aren't necessarily the best, so for myself Geroch's comments were very welcome and mostly quite helpful – and he also describes more recent developments in this field. I’m certain it would have made a difference if I had started out with this edition, and I’d recommend it to anyone.




This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. show less

“The universe of these beings is finite and yet has no limits.” – Albert Einstein, in chapter XXXI

So says one of the great thinkers – perhaps, the great thinker – of the twentieth century in explaining his general theory of relativity. While there was much mathematical in its derivation, Einstein explains it in common language to the educated reader in this short work. He also explains the special theory of relativity here. While such things are hard to digest (at least at first), show more they are certainly able to be digested in this format. That this presentation exists in such clarity at all bespeaks to Einstein’s genius.

I once took theology classes at a seminary on Mercer Street in Princeton, just down the street from where Einstein used to live. Stories about his commonness yet uncommonness still filled the town. He amazingly had the gall to claim that the universe was circular or elliptical – and then attempted to prove it. He did so by clear thought, not by experiment as he was a theoritician, and this book contains an accessible version of those thoughts. For that reason alone, the curious reader is encouraged to dwell deeply within this record of his understanding.

Like mathematics, physics is a field full of geniuses whose ingenuity is common with respect to each other. I am not a physicist, and I will not attempt to comment on the science presented. From what I understand, some of Einstein’s formulations have been questioned by contemporary experiments, and string theory (though still unproven) attempts to generalize even further. To me, neither of these discredits Einstein’s accomplishment with regards to relativity. Of course, his annus mirabilis (“miracle year” of 1905) included other important findings like Brownian motion, and for better or for worse, his legacy will forever be bound with the Manhattan project and its atomic bomb.

Thumbing through a work like this and dwelling on the beauty of its contents surely provide one of the greatest experiences humans can have. Only a handful of works, like those by Immanuel Kant or Isaac Newton or Augustine of Hippo, reach the heights like this. As such, anyone with any inkling of interest in physics should attempt to study these theories, and who better to read than the author of them himself? I enjoyed my time reading this work immensely. The translation is clear and scientific, but reading still is a little difficult due to the complex subject matter. Nonetheless, being a dog eating the crumbs from Einstein’s table still provides quite a treat! show less

I read this about 25 years ago, when I was in college and rather enamored with physics. I must have been pretty odd already; I couldn't put it down and stayed up all night reading it. I was absolutely captivated. I had to stretch my mind to its limits to not nearly grasp concepts Einstein had clearly visualized well before it was possible to verify them empirically. It’s been a long time, but I remember it being well written, even simple, and charming as well. It explained relativity (and show more discussed the question of whether the universe is bounded or not) infinitely better (okay, bad pun) than my physics texts and professors. It’s not Harry Potter, but you just might find it hard to put down, too. show less