Einstein’s E=mc2 ‘was Italian’s idea’ – Guardian.co.uk: The mathematical equation that ushered in the atomic age was discovered by an unknown Italian dilettante two years before Albert Einstein used it in developing the theory of relativity, it was claimed yesterday.
Olinto De Pretto, an industrialist from Vicenza, published the equation E=mc2 in a scientific magazine, Atte, in 1903, said Umberto Bartocci, a mathematical historian.
Einstein allegedly used De Pretto’s insight in a major paper published in 1905, but De Pretto was never acclaimed, said Professor Bartocci of the University of Perugia.
Thieving bastard!
This may be the case, but Einstein demonstrated that he not only understood the concept, he built on it. De Pretto had the means and opportunity to challenge Einstein, but didn’t (as far as we know). This may be an interesting footnote, but isn’t even on the same level as the telephone invention controversy.
Or the radio for that matter…
Tesla rulez.
This reminds me of claims by some historians that the Wright Brothers did not “invent” the airplane – others were flying around. I’m sure Bohl was not the first scientist to start thinking of the proper atomic view we have today, nor was Newton the first to consider the square inverse ratio for gravity. For that matter, Wolfenstein 3D was not the first FPS game (I think “Shadowcaster” or some such was closer to the “true” idea).
But each of these men, including Einstein, completed the ideas to the point that they could be considered “done”. This italian gentleman I’m sure was brilliant and figured this out – but then what? Evidently he never pursued it to the completion, demonstrated *how* this information could be used. Newton took his square inverse law and used it to show how the moon and planets could move, the Wright brothers took the idea of flight and produced a model that could be replicated and perform time after time.
Einstein didn’t need to create a bomb to show his theory was correct, but he certainly continued the thinking until he was able to see just where it would lead to – and explained quite a bit about the workings of the universe in the process.
So, Bravo to our italian gentleman – you were first. But science isn’t a race, it’s a map making endeavor, and in the end, it would seem that your map wasn’t complete enough for full credit.
#3 – Right on! Tesla Rocks! And I thought I was their only fan.
#4, or as Sir Issac Newton put it:
“If I have seen further it is by standing on ye shoulders of giants”
#5, I was referring to Nicolai Tesla, but the group is OK too.
#2 smartalix
“De Pretto had the means and opportunity to challenge Einstein” sound more like an assumption on your part. Do you have something of material basis for the statement?
Plagiarism is as #1 Mike rightly noted for the “Thieving bastard!”. I don’t mean to undermine in the least Einstein vast work. I have the utmost respect and know physics today would still be uncovering the truths he uncovered early last century. No computer could every do what Einstein did in his famous gedanken Experiments. Today THINKING PHYSICS IS GEDANKEN PHYSICS thanks all to Einstein.
Each Eureka moment really does need to be properly credited for Scientist to maintain the integrity and total dignity of their work. Allot of good Science would not be done, if people felt they would not get proper credit. It makes for a fair and open system. Let’s not close it down.
The issue is more the just the integrity of Einstein work, it’s about continuing the integrity and total dignity of the scientific work process. It take allot of discipline and rigor to maintain these highest level of fact fidelity in advancing the front of human knowledge.
Many dedicated people can only maintain the highest levels of discipline and rigor because their colleague do.
Let’s be big and not break the system because of an oversight, intentional or not.
Einstein is one of my favorite thinkers, if only I had 100th of his mind power.
Let the chips fall where they may!!
#4, John,
So, Bravo to our italian gentleman – you were first. But science isn’t a race, it’s a map making endeavor, and in the end, it would seem that your map wasn’t complete enough for full credit.
Well said and I agree whole heartedly.
#5, You are now. The other fan died.
NPR just did a thing on Einstein today (Talk of the Nation?) and they mentioned this — not about the Italian — but about Einstein’s theory floating around for quite a while before the math was actually done.
He formulated it conceptually but needed help with the math. He was actually worried that someone would claim-jump his theory so he recruited a partner for the math.
Apparently his real genius was in theories and grand concepts but not so much math. (still incredibly smart at that too, I assume.)
DISCLAIMER: I had the show on in the background while I worked so I didn’t catch the details and names but I think I got this much correct.
The article says Einstein used the equation in developing the theory of relativity, but in John Rigden’s book “Einstein 1905” it was pointed out that Einstein didn’t even publish the equation until several months after the paper on Special Relativity. Apparently it had been pointed out to him or he discovered on his own that the equation naturally followed from the mathematics of Special Relativity.
So I don’t think any case can be made that Einstein stole the equation. #2 and #4 have it right — someone may invent, say, the brick, but the person who builds the first complete brick building has done the greater work.
Also Meuci was the Italian-American who invented the telephone one year before Alexander Graham Bell.
It’s difficult to tell how significant this is without seeing how he derived the equation. Einstein derived E=mc^2 from the Lorentz transformation equations (sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)) which result from the relative motion of different frames of reference. But these equations preceded relativity, as Lorentz had proposed them as an ad hoc correction to explain why the Michelson-Morley experiment failed to detect luminiferous ether, the medium through which physicists believed light waves traveled.
Even if de Pretto derived them this way, it would be mainly a mathematical derivation linked to a theory that has been proven wrong. He got the right result for the wrong reasons. Should he get credit?
That’s why I keep quiet about a lot of my theories, some numbnutz will take credit for them.
#12, which is confirmation of my view that economics was a far more interesting educational pursuit than physics. 😛
#2
“De Pretto had the means and opportunity to challenge Einstein, but didn’t (as far as we know). ”
That’s because Einstein is Jewish and De Pretto is not 😉
Well, as Einstein himself said, “The secret to creativity is knowing how to hide your sources.”
#12, which is confirmation of my view that economics was a far more interesting educational pursuit than physics.
Sorry, I tried not making it too technical. Hmm, I guess I’ll stick to subjects I don’t know much about.
12, nathaniel, you’ve got it.
de Pretto’s E=mc^2 is only good for mass at rest. Einstein _derived_ the same from his special theory of relativity, using the Lorentz factor gamma which relates observer velocity to c, and E^2 – (p c)^2 = (m c^2)^2 in which E and p are relative to the observer. Since de Pretto didn’t know about relativity, Einstein gets most of the credit.
Perhaps Einstein got some of his ideas from DePretto, but Einstein is the creator of one of the most elegant theories of all time, and one that has yet to be disproved.
Where would Hawking and black hole theory be without Einstein? Should we give Einstein the credit for black hole theory and the new cosmological constant though he dismissed both?
I thought Einstein invented pizza.
#20
No, you’re confusing Einstein’s theory with geometry theory.
A pizza is so called because its volume is given by pi*z*z*a
(where z=the radius and a=the height). 🙂
Gore invented Pizza, but gave it up because it poluted the atmosphere.
And Lord Cavendish discovered most of the principles of electromagnetism in the mid-1700s, long before Faraday, Maxwell, and Heaviside published their papers. Trouble is that Cavendish never told anyone. Does that mean that we should measure capacitors in “Cavends” instead of Farads?
#20 fred I am such the nerd, your comment is the best
“A pizza is so called because its volume is given by pi*z*z*a
(where z=the radius and a=the height).”
I’ll use it some day, more to amuse myself then impress anyone else, I am sure. 🙂
7, 15,
I am making the small asumption that an italian industrialist (as the gentleman is described) would have at the minimum the organizational and financial wherewithal of his organization. If he built the company he ran at the time he’d have the moxie, too.
#25
And I wouldn’t be surprised that the US goverment made sure Einstein was the one who discovered it because no goverment wants it’s major proyect based on something a crook “invented.”
Something the US goverment of today has shown quite well *coughnoWMDsinIraq*
Its all relative!