Original Discoveries

Interdisciplinary science discussions. Also, if you are not sure where to place your thread, please post it here.

Original Discoveries

Postby rajnz00 on August 25th, 2017, 5:44 pm 

Newton once said he stood on the “shoulders of giants”. He was right. Galileo first recognised that uniform motion was indistinguishable from being stationary and formulated the laws of falling bodies. Robert Hooke may have discovered the inverse square law of gravitation before Newton.

The Babylonians discovered trigonometry a thousand years before the Greeks, as the Plimpton 322 tablet has now revealed. Not only that but they did so using fractions of the sexagesimal system, producing trigonometric tables more accurate than the Greeks and indeed modern methods using angles and circles.

America was discovered by humans, and even Europeans, long before Columbus and many discoveries of Einstein were possibly plagiarised from others. E=mc^2 was around long before he added it to the Theory of Relativity, apropos nothing.

Darwin had Larmark and Wallace. Then there are the discoveries of DNA actually by Friedrich Miescher. James Watson and Francis Crick solved the structure of DNA. Other scientists, like Rosalind Franklin and Maurice Wilkins, also contributed to this discovery.

There were electrons and nuclei, protons and neutrons, atoms and molecules, microbes, the second law of thermodynamics.

Original discoveries that can be unambiguously assigned to Galileo – the moons of Jupiter, sunspots, Saturn’s rings. Falling bodies? What are other scientific, astronomical or geographical discoveries that can be unambiguously assigned to one person?
rajnz00
Member
 
Posts: 275
Joined: 28 Dec 2016


Re: Original Discoveries

Postby doogles on August 25th, 2017, 6:20 pm 

Maybe the following do not apply as 'Anything Science', but they are a part of medical science, and Pasteur's amazing observations certainly helped standardise the manufacture of many varieties of food and drink products.

The following are a few I can list just ‘off the top of my head’.

Louis Pasteur identified micro-organisms as being present in air, being responsible variously for putrefaction, fermentation of fruit juices, and disease in animals and humans.

Sammulweis discovered that if obstetricians washed their hands in chlorinated lime solutions, the death rates from puerperal fever in his hospital dropped from 15% to 1%.

John Snow observed that cholera was transmitted via drinking water and not miasma.
User avatar
doogles
Member
 
Posts: 991
Joined: 11 Apr 2009
Location: BRISBANE


Re: Original Discoveries

Postby Braininvat on August 25th, 2017, 7:08 pm 

...and many discoveries of Einstein were possibly plagiarised from others....


Per forum rules, this paragraph needs some citation, if you are going to call Einstein a plagiarist. And "possibly" is an equivocation that suggests perhaps you lack evidence. In which case, it would be best to delete.
User avatar
Braininvat
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 6574
Joined: 21 Jan 2014
Location: Black Hills


Re: Original Discoveries

Postby rajnz00 on August 25th, 2017, 8:22 pm 

Braininvat » August 25th, 2017, 7:08 pm wrote:
...and many discoveries of Einstein were possibly plagiarised from others....


Per forum rules, this paragraph needs some citation,


It was well known that Einstein had a bloated ego. He had no problem with attaching his name to theories of others which he had no part in formulating. Like the Bose–Einstein statistics.

Einstein's 1905 paper contained no references. Are we to believe that he discovered everything on his own? I don't think so.

"Albert Einstein - Plagiarist of the Century" https://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/esp_einstein.htm

"ORIGIN AND CONCEPT OF RELATIVITY (I)" G. H. KESWANI

"Was Einstein the First to Invent E = mc2?"

"The great physicist was not the first to equate forms of mass to energy, nor did he definitively prove the relationship" https://www.scientificamerican.com/arti ... ent-e-mc2/

There was Oliver Heaviside, Wilhelm Wien, Max Abraham, John Henry Poynting, and Henri Poincare. Did Einstein give credit to any of these in his paper? No.

Which means the equation was around before him (I read somewhere it was even attributed to an Italian almost a century before Einstein). If you adopt an equation without proof and it subsequently proves to be correct, should you be given credit for it? Was he clairvoyant?

And "possibly" is an equivocation that suggests perhaps you lack evidence. In which case, it would be best to delete.


"Possibly" is scientific. Certainty is an article of faith that does not belong in science. Why am I alone required to delete my posts or have them locked, when such eminent scientists like BadgerJelly with scientific posts like "Backwards Land" get a free pass?
rajnz00
Member
 
Posts: 275
Joined: 28 Dec 2016


Re: Original Discoveries

Postby Serpent on August 25th, 2017, 10:08 pm 

rajnz00 » August 25th, 2017, 7:22 pm wrote:
There was Oliver Heaviside, Wilhelm Wien, Max Abraham, John Henry Poynting, and Henri Poincare. Did Einstein give credit to any of these in his paper? No.

Which means the equation was around before him (I read somewhere it was even attributed to an Italian almost a century before Einstein).

What do you mean by "was around?" Around where? How come nobody noticed it until Einstein pointed it out? "I read somewhere" and "was attributed to" are not quite definitive proof of plagiarism.

If you adopt an equation without proof and it subsequently proves to be correct, should you be given credit for it? Was he clairvoyant?

So, which is it? Everybody already knew, or he was just guessing? How come nobody minded at the time?

If every scientist who published a paper prefaced it by giving credit to everyone who dealt with the subject matter, back to Archimedes, symposia could get a bit a tedious. How about every speaker just start with
"For what we are about to hear, may the giants make us truly thankful."
Serpent
Resident Member
 
Posts: 3015
Joined: 24 Dec 2011


Re: Original Discoveries

Postby rajnz00 on August 25th, 2017, 11:37 pm 

Serpent » August 25th, 2017, 10:08 pm wrote:What do you mean by "was around?" Around where? How come nobody noticed it until Einstein pointed it out? "I read somewhere" and "was attributed to" are not quite definitive proof of plagiarism.


Around with the people whose names I have mentioned.

The English physicist Oliver Heaviside in 1889 showed that the effective mass m = (4⁄3) E / c2, where E is the energy of a sphere’s electric field. German physicists Wilhelm Wien and Max Abraham got the same result, which became known as the “electromagnetic mass” of the classical electron.

Hasenöhrl in 1904 enunciated a thought experiment considering the mass inherent in heat very similar to Einstein’s which lead to E = mc2

Was Einstein ignorant of Hasenöhrl's work?

The English physicist John Henry Poynting derived for energy density in 1884 E = mc2, where m = ρV, ρ is the mass per unit volume, V is the volume of the mass itself and c is the speed of light.

So, which is it? Everybody already knew, or he was just guessing? How come nobody minded at the time?


If you read about Einstein you will realise he was a master self-publicist, rather like Donald Trump, though admittedly smarter. He courted famous scientists like Max Planck and when he became famous used brilliant younger scientists for his own ends.
rajnz00
Member
 
Posts: 275
Joined: 28 Dec 2016


Re: Original Discoveries

Postby rajnz00 on August 26th, 2017, 1:51 am 

doogles » August 25th, 2017, 6:20 pm wrote:The following are a few I can list just ‘off the top of my head’.

Louis Pasteur identified micro-organisms as being present in air, being responsible variously for putrefaction, fermentation of fruit juices, and disease in animals and humans.

Absolutely. He had several firsts.

Sammulweis discovered that if obstetricians washed their hands in chlorinated lime solutions, the death rates from puerperal fever in his hospital dropped from 15% to 1%.

Agreed
John Snow observed that cholera was transmitted via drinking water and not miasma.


Was he the first though?

Every planet not known to the ancients would have been a first to their discoverers, then the elements
rajnz00
Member
 
Posts: 275
Joined: 28 Dec 2016


Re: Original Discoveries

Postby Serpent on August 26th, 2017, 9:23 am 

rajnz00 » August 25th, 2017, 10:37 pm wrote:
Was Einstein ignorant of Hasenöhrl's work?

How should I know? The question I posed was: Were all the eminent scientists of the day ignorant of it?
"Around with" is not much of an answer, either. If you mean they had all published the same formula in the same context, I would have to then ask whether they each claimed it as original and were they all recognized at the time --- or only after Einstein synthesized their theories? And, in any case, why wait a century to notice the similarities? Was the entire scientific community asleep in some enchanted ivory tower all this time?

If you read about Einstein you will realise he was a master self-publicist

That only works after he was recognized in scientific circles, not before. I doubt Planck would easily be hoodwinked by a blowhard, even if the blowhard managed to get close enough.

, rather like Donald Trump, though admittedly smarter.

Please don't make this comparison. If you'd said Edison, I might have taken you more seriously.

Bigger question: Why the recent spate of Einstein-bashing in the various forums? It's a phenomenon I've been noticing. He's been dead a while - why is he suddenly bothering people with nothing at stake?

Biggest question: Is any human thought since the invention of sign language entirely original? Could you tell where learning leaves off and invention begins, short of raising the person in strict quarantine?
Serpent
Resident Member
 
Posts: 3015
Joined: 24 Dec 2011


Re: Original Discoveries

Postby rajnz00 on August 26th, 2017, 7:51 pm 

Serpent » August 26th, 2017, 9:23 am wrote:
rajnz00 » August 25th, 2017, 10:37 pm wrote:Was Einstein ignorant of Hasenöhrl's work?

Serpent » August 26th, 2017, 9:23 am wrote:
How should I know?

The question was rhetorical. You should be able to make an intelligent guess on the probability of him being ignorant seeing as he worked in a patent office and was pretty clued up on the latest developments in science in the fields he was working on
Bigger question: Why the recent spate of Einstein-bashing in the various forums?

How should I know? How do I know that what you are saying is even true? The only way I could is to browse the various forums for this information, something that I am supremely uninterested in doing. I am not btw indulging in Einstein bashing, just bringing forth some facts. And why do you think it is a bigger question or indeed a question of any importance what-so-ever?

Here is another piece of information
"1915 - On November 25, nearly ten years after the foundation of special relativity, Einstein submitted his paper The Field Equations of Gravitation for publication, which gave the correct field equations for the theory of general relativity (or general relativity for short). Actually, the German mathematician David Hilbert submitted an article containing the correct field equations for general relativity five days before Einstein. Hilbert never claimed priority for this theory." https://www.nobelprize.org/educational/ ... ory-1.html
He never claimed priority for his theory? So bloody what. The world should give priority and recognition where recognition is due.
rajnz00
Member
 
Posts: 275
Joined: 28 Dec 2016


Re: Original Discoveries

Postby Serpent on August 26th, 2017, 8:36 pm 

Thanks for the clarification.
Good luck with your upbraiding of the world.
Serpent
Resident Member
 
Posts: 3015
Joined: 24 Dec 2011


Re: Original Discoveries

Postby doogles on August 26th, 2017, 9:36 pm 

rajnz00 » Sat Aug 26, 2017 1:51 am wrote:
doogles » August 25th, 2017, 6:20 pm wrote:The following are a few I can list just ‘off the top of my head’.

Louis Pasteur identified micro-organisms as being present in air, being responsible variously for putrefaction, fermentation of fruit juices, and disease in animals and humans.

Absolutely. He had several firsts.

Sammulweis discovered that if obstetricians washed their hands in chlorinated lime solutions, the death rates from puerperal fever in his hospital dropped from 15% to 1%.

Agreed
John Snow observed that cholera was transmitted via drinking water and not miasma.


Was he the first though?

Every planet not known to the ancients would have been a first to their discoverers, then the elements


I take your point about John Snow. It's quite possible that Snow's wife or one of the people on the street noted that in one area, all of the cases of cholera occurred on one side of the street, but Snow was the only one qualified to publish anything on the matter and to get things moving.

There was a similar claim made about Jenner's role in the discovery that cowpox infection would protect people against smallpox. Jenner claimed a 30,000 Pounds reward for this. Subsequently, a parish priest or someone of similar status, notified authorities that a farmer named Benjamin Jesty had filed off the eye of a sewing needle and used the 2-pronged stilette to scoop up some exudate from a cowpox lesion and scratch it onto the arms of his wife and 2 sons, 20 years earlier. All survived subsequent outbreaks of smallpox. You can read a Wikipedia account of this by typing 'Benjamin Jesty' into Google.

This type of 'plagiarism' could be more widespread than we recognise.

I'm amused at the fact that in the case of Benjamin Jesty, he was not reported as using himself as one of the guinea pigs. And even in that case, we have no idea whether Jesty got the idea from someone else.
User avatar
doogles
Member
 
Posts: 991
Joined: 11 Apr 2009
Location: BRISBANE


Re: Original Discoveries

Postby Braininvat on August 27th, 2017, 11:04 am 

Raj, in the nobelprize dot org link that you provided in support of your plagiarism theory, I will note that the first paragraph of the timeline provided said this:

Einstein was far from being the only person who contributed to the development of the theory of special relativity. However, he was the one who put everything together.


It's called synthesis. It's what Einstein did. Not the same as plagiarism. Hilbert may have had some field equations that could be used to define a curved manifold, but he didn't realize their implications. Einstein did. That took vision, originality, and brilliance.

You have not yet proved your theory, and I expect nothing than less than proof for such a serious charge. Otherwise, let's move on and explore the history of original discoveries more broadly, as Doogles et al. have done.
User avatar
Braininvat
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 6574
Joined: 21 Jan 2014
Location: Black Hills


Re: Original Discoveries

Postby Serpent on August 27th, 2017, 12:08 pm 

If one contributor submits a paper to a scientific publication five days after another contributor submits a paper with the same content, presumably both papers fall within the same submission period, which may be up to a six months before publication.
During that time, the only one who has opportunity to read both papers is the editor of the publication. It should be his or her job to spot the similarity and question the origin of both submissions; contact both contributors, and alert them to the synchronicity of their theories. Then, if satisfied that there was no opportunity for one to copy or steal the other's work (N: date of submission does not necessarily correspond to date of discovery; some people go over their math more carefully; some are poor spellers and need a proofreader.) he would - well, I would, anyway - publish both papers, side by side, in the same issue, wirth accompanying explanation, and let the community judge their merit.

Of course, if two similar papers are submitted to two different publications, that come out on different schedules, in two different countries, nobody can tell which was first. It's even quite possible for half of the scientific community to be unaware of the existence of one or the other, until they meet at the next international symposium. But it shouldn't take a century.
Serpent
Resident Member
 
Posts: 3015
Joined: 24 Dec 2011


Re: Original Discoveries

Postby rajnz00 on August 28th, 2017, 4:36 am 

Braininvat wrote:You have not yet proved your theory

I do not have any theory. I have not disputed the genius of Einstein. My post is about supposed original discoveries that have histories in the past. Some people have claimed Einstein plagiarised some of his work. I have given some references.
Plagiarism is the "wrongful appropriation" and "stealing and publication" of another author's "language, thoughts, ideas, or expressions" and the representation of them as one's own original work.Notice it includes thoughts and ideas. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plagiarism
Whether he did or not the fact remains that
1. “Albert Einstein presented the theories of special relativity and general relativity in groundbreaking publications that either contained no formal references to previous literature, or referred only to a small number of his predecessors for fundamental results on which he based his theories” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relativit ... ty_dispute
2. “Einstein is best known by the general public for his mass–energy equivalence formula E = mc2 (which has been dubbed "the world's most famous equation").” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Einstein
The equation he is most famous for - he did not either first state, derive or ever prove. It was formulated at least as early as 1884 by John Henry Poynting and also by Henri Poincare in that exact form. In fact in Einstein’s annus mirabilis paper “Ist die Trägheit eines Körpers von seinem Energieinhalt abhängig?” (Does the Inertia of a Body Depend upon its Energy-Content?) E=mc2 doesn’t even appear.
In that paper, he concludes:
If a body gives off the energy L in the form of radiation, its mass diminishes by L/c². The fact that the energy withdrawn from the body becomes energy of radiation evidently makes no difference, so that we are led to the more general conclusion that
The mass of a body is a measure of its energy-content; if the energy changes by L, the mass changes in the same sense by L/9 × 1020, the energy being measured in ergs, and the mass in grammes.
It is not impossible that with bodies whose energy-content is variable to a high degree (e.g. with radium salts) the theory may be successfully put to the test.
If the theory corresponds to the facts, radiation conveys inertia between the emitting and absorbing bodies
.” http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/E_mc2/www/
Does that sound like Universal equivalence of mass and energy to you? Somewhere down the line it became that, but that is not how he formulated it. He did not say that mass and energy are equivalent and interchangeable as is the modern understanding. That was a later development.
3. He added his name to theories of others he had no part in formulating.
rajnz00
Member
 
Posts: 275
Joined: 28 Dec 2016


Re: Original Discoveries

Postby BioWizard on October 18th, 2017, 4:51 pm 

Serpent » 27 Aug 2017 11:08 am wrote:If one contributor submits a paper to a scientific publication five days after another contributor submits a paper with the same content, presumably both papers fall within the same submission period, which may be up to a six months before publication.
During that time, the only one who has opportunity to read both papers is the editor of the publication. It should be his or her job to spot the similarity and question the origin of both submissions; contact both contributors, and alert them to the synchronicity of their theories. Then, if satisfied that there was no opportunity for one to copy or steal the other's work (N: date of submission does not necessarily correspond to date of discovery; some people go over their math more carefully; some are poor spellers and need a proofreader.) he would - well, I would, anyway - publish both papers, side by side, in the same issue, wirth accompanying explanation, and let the community judge their merit.

Of course, if two similar papers are submitted to two different publications, that come out on different schedules, in two different countries, nobody can tell which was first. It's even quite possible for half of the scientific community to be unaware of the existence of one or the other, until they meet at the next international symposium. But it shouldn't take a century.


That actually happens more than people might think. And sometimes editors from different journals talk to one another and try to sync such publications even if they were submitted to different journals.

And this is not surprising. The very fact that we are synthesizing from what's already out there means that several of us are likely to arrive to the same conclusions every now and then.
User avatar
BioWizard
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 12763
Joined: 24 Mar 2005
Location: United States
Blog: View Blog (3)


Re: Original Discoveries

Postby Serpent on October 18th, 2017, 7:48 pm 

BioWizard » October 18th, 2017, 3:51 pm wrote:[simultaneous submission]
That actually happens more than people might think. And sometimes editors from different journals talk to one another and try to sync such publications even if they were submitted to different journals.

It's so easy now to make fast contact. Of course, there are far more members of the scientific community to stay in touch with, and vast amount of literature to sort through.

And this is not surprising. The very fact that we are synthesizing from what's already out there means that several of us are likely to arrive to the same conclusions every now and then.

Which is why discoveries come in waves, soon followed by a wave of inventions based on the new knowledge.

It's probably helpful to differentiate between an idea "being around" and a theory being fully developed and formulated.
Serpent
Resident Member
 
Posts: 3015
Joined: 24 Dec 2011



Return to Anything Science

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Brent696, Google [Bot] and 20 guests