Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Original Einstein Manuscript Discovered

ScuttleMonkey posted more than 9 years ago | from the not-so-theoretical-manuscript dept.

Science 325

vinlud writes "The original manuscript of a paper Albert Einstein published in 1925 has been found in the archives of Leiden University's Lorentz Institute for Theoretical Physics. The German-language manuscript is titled "Quantum theory of the monatomic ideal gas," and is dated December 1924. It is considered one of Einstein's last great breakthroughs. High-resolution photographs of the 16-page manuscript are posted on the institute's web site."

cancel ×

325 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Other than (3, Interesting)

LordChaos (2432) | more than 9 years ago | (#13365012)

... being one of the first people to make the world see that atomic warfare was not such a good idea - to which he devoted much of his later life.

Re:Other than (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13365081)

which saved way more lives by ending the war, than had it continued.
get the facts ass hole.
i love you idiots that think war can be fought without the loss of lives.

Re:Other than (0)

benna (614220) | more than 9 years ago | (#13365107)

It killed women, children, and other civilians in place of soldiers though. This is unacceptable.

Why? (0)

hackwrench (573697) | more than 9 years ago | (#13365130)

Their defense is the purpose to which the soldier is put. Remove the civilians, remove the purpose for enemy soldiers. Problem solved.

Re:Other than (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13365141)

yes that is very acceptable. maybe you should study military history sometime. there are no innocent enemy civilians. anybody contributing to that country is contributing to the death of OUR soldiers. women/children/civilians work in factories help producing weapons/ammo to kill our soldiers. even just working to help feed their soldiers, aids them. there are no innocent people in the country you go to war with.

Re:Other than (1)

benna (614220) | more than 9 years ago | (#13365251)

I don't look at it that way. I would prefer to minimize civilian deaths on both sides before minimizing soldier casualties on my own. I realize many of the civilians (though by no means all) contribute to the war effort, but this is not really an excuse. They are not the ones dropping the bombs, firing the bullets, etc. And what about the children? They weren't contributing.

Re:Other than (5, Insightful)

drgonzo59 (747139) | more than 9 years ago | (#13365337)

The issue of "civilian" vs. "fighter" is often not a black and white kind of thing. If someone is supporting the Nazis and chose to help build the concentration camps, even though they could have had other equally paid job, are they an enemy combatant? What about those that produced Zyklon B (hydrocyanic acid) used in gas chambers, are they enemy combatants? I think they are.

Why doesn't the same apply to the people who worked for the Mitsubishi arms plant in Nagasaki? Most of the town employees where working at the plant building weapons and ammunition to kill Americans. They could have chosen to be farmers, or say teachers, instead they most likely did support the goverment policy and the war against us.

You are right, the children weren't fighting yet, but the ones in Berlin were, and if we invaded Japan a lot more children would have been dead, because they would have been forced to defend "the Empire"

One thing that is always usefull to keep in mind is that it was the Japanese that attacked the U.S. What in the hell were they thinking? It is like me attacking the local police department with a baseball bat, I know I will get in trouble and end up in jail for a long time. If I get my family and friends on it, they will end up in jail for a long time too. Someone might ask me "what in the hell were you thinking?" Same thing with Japan. It was their goverment that sealed the fate of its children and elderly when they attacked U.S. It wasn't a defensive war, it wasn't even a preemtive attack, I don't think US would have ever attacked Japan unprovoked. So when they sent the battleships and the airplanes to Pearl Harbor, they technically "killed" a lot of Japanese civilians and as well as fighters.

On the other side, let's imagine that Japan would have won the war (impossible but let's try) do you think they would hesitate bombing New York, or LA or other major city because there are civilians in it? Probably not, judging by what they did in China [fas.org]

Re:Other than (5, Insightful)

Rakishi (759894) | more than 9 years ago | (#13365156)

...as does almost every other fuckin weapon and war. Dresden had more deaths than either atomic bomb.

The alternative was an invasion, had that happened you'd be bitching about how we should have used the bomb to save the millions that died due to the invasion.

In Berlin children and the elderly were forced to fight or be shot by their own side. Many died, most were lacking decent weaponry or supplies and simply acted as a last ditch human shield. You think the Japanese would somehow act "better" during an invasion than the Germans did?

Of course, this is not counting the thousands who would die of disease or famine as they resist invasion on their already supply starved island. Then there would have been the inevitable massive non-nuclear bombings so common during WW2, which would probably lead to many more deaths alone than the two atomic bombs did.

In a more philosophical sense, there were few real civilians as they were almost all helping the war effort one way or another (Japanese are efficient that way). The American troops were also civilians till they got dragged into this, so were the Japanese troops for that matter.

Hey dude (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13365186)

Here's what happened:

Japanese plead for a conditional surrender, to leave the emperor as the head of state.

US finds this unacceptable, nukes them twice.

US settles for a conditional surrender, leaving the emperor as the head of state.

Re:Hey dude (1)

Rakishi (759894) | more than 9 years ago | (#13365257)

*sigh*
We had an unconditional surrender, although the emperor was kept as a non-divine figurehead. This was not required although the US probably decided it would lead to the best post-war atmosphere. In addition, I'm rather sure that the Japanese terms involved no occupation of Japan, letting the Japanese prosecute their own war criminals and at least some powers still left to the emperor.

Re:Other than (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13365209)

Oh wise one, please explain why absolute surrender of Japan was neccisary?

If we had to choose between losing a million soldiers or a few hundred thousand of the enemy's civilians, our military leaders weren't looking outside the box. You bomb the fuck out of their military structures, and you form a blockade around the country. You starve it. That would cause one of two things: surrender, or a collapse of industrialization. If people in an intelligent society can't rely on the international community for supplies, they'll revert back to their pastorial roots, and turn back to farming.

Re:Other than (4, Interesting)

Rakishi (759894) | more than 9 years ago | (#13365288)


Japan was already starving, didn't do much to them. There is no such thing as "military complexes" as all industry was at the time basically a military installation. You'd have to bomb them back a few centuries, and even then they could secretly make weapons to send against your fleet. Suicide attacks to them weren't exactly against the rules.

From a US point of view a blockade would be expensive and probably unpopular, and Japan could last a while. Humanitarian agencies would object, complain and Japan would sooner or later get sent food anyway.

I'm rather sure that a lot more than a few hundred thousand would die of starvation before they managed to get farming up to a level where it could support the nation, probably millions would be dead as without industrialization farming could never support their population. So you advocate the starving of millions compared to the nuking of thousands, interesting position.

If you wish to see what a nation can degrade into given an insane enough government, look at North Korea. Doesn't mean the people are somehow unintelligent" or "uncivilized" simply that the government is too oppressive. Remember, for a long time most of Europe was composed of peasants (ie: mindless slaves).

Re:Other than (2, Informative)

PsiPsiStar (95676) | more than 9 years ago | (#13365370)

You bomb the fuck out of their military structures, and you form a blockade around the country. You starve it.

I don't suppose you authored the policy on Cuba, huh?

If you took the time to do a proper blocade,

1. The Japanese Atomic bomb program, which was more advanced than the German Atomic bomb program, might have resulted in usable Japanese atomic weapon. Japan had bases on the Asian mainland free from the steady bombing that Germany was subjected to, which maked enrichment feasible.

2. China and Russia were waiting in the wings to invade, and get revenge on Japan for all the pain it had caused those countries. The US wanted to deal with postwar Japan. Things would have been worse for the Japanese if the Chinese and Russians had invaded instead of the Japanese surrenduring to the US.

Re:Other than (1)

nathanh (1214) | more than 9 years ago | (#13365276)

The alternative was an invasion...

Because there are only ever two options.

Re:Other than (1)

Rakishi (759894) | more than 9 years ago | (#13365306)

No, these were simply the two options asfaik seen at the time as solutions which are likely to lead to the desired result. It is documented that an invasion was expected if the bombs were not dropped as Japan was not likely to surrender, as such I am working within the confines of history. If you have another one, which doesn't rely on some horrid amount of hindsight to work, then please post it. It would be even better if you had some historical references that the idea was thought up at the time, as otherwise it really wasn't a workable solution. Otherwise, goodbye Mr. Troll.

Re:Other than (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13365157)

> It killed women, children, and other civilians in place of soldiers though. This is unacceptable.

Right, because the japs took special pains not to kill women and children...

Re:Other than (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13365232)

So it was justified then? Somehow I don't think two wrongs make a right.

Re:Other than (1)

raider_red (156642) | more than 9 years ago | (#13365136)

They're best not fought at all. This may not always be possible, and war may sometimes be a necessary evil.

Though it may be necessary, it is still evil, and should only be approached with the greatest trepidation and after all good options have been exhausted.

Re:Other than (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13365203)

Seeing that the US and the world basically waited till they had no choice, I believe WW2 in general meets that statement. Unfortunately, had the allies not waited that long millions of lives would have probably been spared.

Re:Other than (2, Insightful)

nukem996 (624036) | more than 9 years ago | (#13365173)

Actually no. We nuked Japan because we did not want the USSR to liberate Japan, like they did Germany(they were the first ones in Berlin and who killed all the remaining Nazis while we stayed about 60 miles away cleaning up any insurgents). We thought that it would make it look like the Soviets won the war and not the US. In fact many of the leaders in Japan were considering surrendering but would not surrender unconditionally like we wanted, they wanted to be able to keep there emperor who they viewed as God like. Many also believe that it was a race thing, many people hated the Japanese which is one of the reasons why we had interment camps for them. Now you go get your facts please.

Re:Other than (1)

Rakishi (759894) | more than 9 years ago | (#13365238)

Actually no. We nuked Japan because we did not want the USSR to liberate Japan,

While that may have been to some extent an unwritten view, the official one asfaik was to prevent an invasion. Then again, nothing ever does stop conspiracy theories does it?

like they did Germany(they were the first ones in Berlin and who killed all the remaining Nazis while we stayed about 60 miles away cleaning up any insurgents).

They got to Berlin first because Churchill, Stalin and Roosevelt agreed beforehand that the area would belong to the Soviets no matter who took it over. I believe the argument was that it would be a waste of Allied lives to take over Berlin only to have to give it back to the Soviets, may as well have them make the sacrifice.

. In fact many of the leaders in Japan were considering surrendering but would not surrender unconditionally like we wanted, they wanted to be able to keep there emperor who they viewed as God like.

That is true asfaik; I believe the emperor would also retain some powers and his divine status. The US still kept the emperor although with no power and no longer officially divine. Such a conditional surrender may have proved devastating in terms of rebuilding Japan in such a way as to prevent future conflicts.

Many also believe that it was a race thing, many people hated the Japanese which is one of the reasons why we had interment camps for them.

Yes racism is fun, anti-semitism was also rampant everywhere at the time not just Germany. Then again, after what the Japanese did to prisoners of war and those they conquered a certain level of hatred during the end of the war was understandable.

Now you go get your facts please.

Same to you.

Re:Other than (2, Informative)

larry bagina (561269) | more than 9 years ago | (#13365250)

USSR didn't declare war on Japan until august 8, 1945. For reference, the atomic bombs were dropped August 6th and August 9th.

If you take a look at the Yalta conference, you have to wonder if Roosevelt was the most incompetent President ever, or just liked getting fucked up the ass by "Uncle Joe" Stalin.

Consider: in exchange for declaring war on Japan (which they did at the last possible moment), USSR got

  1. All of Eastern Europe
  2. Some of the Japanase Islands
  3. US troops sant around and waited 2 weeks so the Russian troops could "liberate" berlin.

Re:Other than (2, Interesting)

Rakishi (759894) | more than 9 years ago | (#13365315)

From what I've read he was a blind fool who believed Stalin was a "good guy." Churchill didn't seem to have any such illusions. Russia was also able to by not declaring war on Japan to get three nice new US bombers to take apart, it was neutral (as far as the Japan-US war was concerned) so by international treaty it could not give them back to the US after they landed on Russian soil.

Point 3 made sense actually after the conference, Stalin got Berlin anyway so he may as well waste his own man in claiming it instead of the Allies wasting their own men only to give it to Stalin anyway.

Re:Other than (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13365294)

In Soviet Russia, Berlin invades YOU!

shit, where is my suicide pill?

Re:Other than (1)

ErikZ (55491) | more than 9 years ago | (#13365318)


Yeah shocking, isn't it? Hating people you're at war with. :-P

Re:Other than (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13365149)

duh. Is there is a good form of warfare?

Re:Other than (1)

peculiarmethod (301094) | more than 9 years ago | (#13365312)

Other than in video games, thusly improving your hand/eye coordination?

no.

Not exactly (5, Interesting)

mnemonic_ (164550) | more than 9 years ago | (#13365188)

Later in his life, Einstein was rather divided over violent and non-violent resistance. For example, in a 1941 letter to a pacifist he said:
If all the young people in America were to act as you intend to act, the country would be defenseless and easily delivered into slavery.
The issue became progressively more cloudy as Einstein aged. A Guardian article [guardian.co.uk] details Einstein's conversations with a Japanese pen-pal after World War II:
I didn't write that I was an absolute pacifist but that I have always been a convinced pacifist. That means there are circumstances in which in my opinion it is necessary to use force.
Einstein likely changed his views because of the plight of the Jews in Nazi-ruled Germany and elsewhere. Though he was not a practicing Jew, he still felt connected to the Semite people and served the Technion Institute in Israel. By the circumstances of his time, Einstein accepted war as a necessity to combat extraordinary evils.

Re:Not exactly (2, Insightful)

Concerned Onlooker (473481) | more than 9 years ago | (#13365367)

It seems a reasonable, if weird, position. You can feel in your core a disgust of violence, yet if you completely reject the use of force only the pricks and sociopaths will win in the end because they will always happily resort to violence.

amazing (-1, Offtopic)

khrtt (701691) | more than 9 years ago | (#13365014)

The word quantum appears on slashdot in nearly every other article, so that quantum stuff must be so hot. And it's been around for almost a century now. he-he. quantum computing. quantum teleportation. quantum nanotubes.

Re:amazing (3, Funny)

wasted time (891410) | more than 9 years ago | (#13365035)

everything's relative, I guess.

Slashdot (2, Funny)

Vapebait (728259) | more than 9 years ago | (#13365051)

News for Quantum Physicists, Stuff that matters

amazing-Schroeder's First Post. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13365055)

Quantum First Post.

Re:amazing-Schroeder's First Post. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13365145)

"(Score:-1, Troll)"

Let me know moderator when the humour get's too subtle for you. I'll try to keep it at the "sitcom" level next time.

Re:amazing-Schroeder's First Post. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13365386)

Let me know moderator when the humour get's too subtle for you.

"know, moderator, when", "gets".
Also, if you're an American: "humor".

Re:amazing (1)

treff89 (874098) | more than 9 years ago | (#13365088)

Yes. My .sig is clearly no exception.

Re:amazing (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13365099)

fuck that, here in russia it's fucking quantam level cold!

Re:amazing (1)

Rhinobird (151521) | more than 9 years ago | (#13365190)

I want some quantum quantums. I that would be smurfy.

Last post? (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13365017)

Last breakthough, huh.

Albert Einstein: A Jewish Myth (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13365018)

One of the statements of Adolf Hitler most often quoted by the Jewish
media is the following from Mein Kampf, I:10:

"The great masses of people ... will more easily fall victims to a big
lie than to a small one."

Of course, Hitler is quoted out of context in an attempt to portray
this statement as Hitler's own, personal philosophy or strategy. But
if we read this selection in context, we find that he is speaking of
the Jews who had ruined his country, and he is trying to explain how
the German people fell victim to Jewish lies. In fact, Herr Hitler
even tells us what this great lie is that duped the German people into
being controlled by the Jews. He continues:

"Those who know best this truth about the possibilities of the
application of untruth and defamation, however, were at all times the
Jews; for their entire existence is built on one single great lie,
namely, that here one had to deal with a religious brotherhood, while
in fact one has to deal with a race - what a race! As such they have
been nailed down forever, in an eternally correct sentence of
fundamental truth, by one of the greatest minds of mankind; he called
them 'the great masters of lying.' He who does not realize this or
does not want to believe this will never be able to help truth to
victory in this world."

Hitler here was referring to Arthur Schopenhauer, the eminent 19th
century German philosopher who was outspoken regarding the true nature
of Jews. We do not need to rely upon the opinions of German
philosophers and political leaders regarding this character trait of
the Jews, for Jesus Christ has said of the Jews,

"You are of your father the Diabolical One, and the lusts of your
father you wish to do. That one was a murderer from the beginning, and
he has not stood in the truth because there is no truth in him. When
he speaks a lie, he speaks of his own, because he is a liar, and the
father of it" (John 8:44 AST).

Furthermore, the New Testament warns us not to listen to "Judaizing
myths" (Titus 1:14). But Jewish myths are exactly what destroyed
Germany and what have destroyed America today. Herr Hitler may have
been correct in what he felt was the greatest Jewish lie, but there
are many, many more which have had a damning effect on the white race.
One of the greatest is certainly the lie of the Hebrew Masoretic Text
and the removal of the Greek Septuagint from the hands of white
Christians, but each Jewish myth stings with the same poisonous venom.
One of the great Jewish myths of the 20th century is Albert Einstein.

Albert Einstein is held up by the Jewish liars as a rare genius who
drastically changed the field of theoretical physics. As such, he is
made an idol to young people and his very name has become synonymous
with genius. The truth, however, is very different. The reality is
that Einstein was an inept, moronic Jew who could not even tie his own
shoelaces; he contributed nothing original to the field of quantum
mechanics or any other science, but on the contrary he stole the ideas
of other men and the Jewish media made him a hero.

When we actually examine the life of Albert Einstein, we find that his
only brilliance lies in his ability to plagiarize and steal other
people's ideas, passing them off as his own.

Einstein's education, or lack thereof, is an important part of this
story. The Encyclopedia Britannica says of Einstein's early education
that he "showed little scholastic ability." It also says that at the
age of 15, "with poor grades in history, geography, and languages, he
left school with no diploma." Einstein himself wrote in a school paper
of his "lack of imagination and practical ability." In 1895, Einstein
failed a simple entrance exam to an engineering school in Zurich. This
exam consisted mainly of mathematical problems, and Einstein showed
himself to be mathematically inept in this exam. He then entered a
lesser school hoping to use it as a stepping stone to the engineering
school he could not get into, but after graduating in 1900, he still
could not get a position at the engineering school! Unable to go to
the school as he had wanted, he got a job (with the help of a friend)
at the patent office in Bern. He was to be a technical expert third
class, which meant that he was too incompetent for a higher qualified
position. Even after publishing his so-called groundbreaking papers of
1905 and after working in the patent office for six years, he was only
elevated to a second class standing. Remember, the work he was doing
at the patent office, for which he was only rated third class, was not
quantum mechanics or theoretical physics, but was reviewing technical
documents for patents of every day things; yet he was barely
qualified.

He would work at the patent office until 1909, all the while
continuously trying to get a position at a university, but without
success. All of these facts are true, but now begins the Jewish myth.
Supposedly, while working a full time job, without the aid of
university colleagues, a staff of graduate students, a laboratory, or
any of the things normally associated with an academic setting,
Einstein in his spare time wrote four ground-breaking essays in the
field of theoretical physics and quantum mechanics that were published
in 1905. Many people have recognized the impossibility of such a feat,
including Einstein himself, and therefore Einstein has led people to
believe that many of these ideas came to him in his sleep, out of the
blue, because indeed that is the only logical explanation of how an
admittedly inept moron could have written such documents at the age of
26 without any real education. However, a simpler explanation exists:
he stole the ideas and plagiarized the papers.

Therefore, we will look at each of these ideas and discover the source
of each. It should be remembered that these ideas are presented by
Einstein's worshippers as totally new and completely different, each
of which would change the landscape of science. These four papers
dealt with the following four ideas, respectively:

1. The foundation of the photon theory of light;
2. The equivalence of energy and mass;
3. The explanation of Brownian motion in liquids;
4. The special theory of relativity.
Let us first look at the last of these theories, the theory of
relativity. This is perhaps the most famous idea falsely attributed to
Einstein. Specifically, this 1905 paper dealt with what Einstein
called the Special Theory of Relativity (the General Theory would come
in 1915). This theory contradicted the traditional Newtonian mechanics
and was based upon two premises: 1) in the absence of acceleration,
the laws of nature are the same for all observers; and 2) since the
speed of light is independent of the motion of its source, then the
time interval between two events is longer for an observer in whose
frame of reference the events occur at different places than for an
observer in whose frame of reference the events occur in the same
place. This is basically the idea that time passes more slowly as
one's velocity approaches the speed of light, relative to slower
velocities where time would pass faster.

This theory has been validated by modern experiments and is the basis
for modern physics. But these two premises are far from being
originally Einstein's. First of all, the idea that the speed of light
was a constant and was independent of the motion of its source was not
Einstein's at all, but was proposed by the Scottish scientist James
Maxwell. Maxwell studied the phenomenon of light extensively and first
proposed that it was electromagnetic in nature. He wrote an article to
this effect for the 1878 edition of the Encyclopedia Britannica. His
ideas prompted much debate, and by 1887, as a result of his work and
the ensuing debate, the scientific community, particularly Lorentz,
Michelson, and Morley reached the conclusion that the velocity of
light was independent of the velocity of the observer. Thus, this
piece of the Special Theory of Relativity was known 27 years before
Einstein wrote his paper.

This debate over the nature of light also led Michelson and Morley to
conduct an important experiment, the results of which could not be
explained by Newtonian mechanics. They observed a phenomenon caused by
relativity but they did not understand relativity. They had attempted
to detect the motion of the earth through ether, which was a medium
thought to be necessary for the propagation of light.

In response to this problem, in 1889, the Irish physicist George
FitzGerald, who had also first proposed a mechanism for producing
radio waves, wrote a paper which stated that the results of the
Michelson-Morley experiment could be explained if,

"... the length of material bodies changes, according as they are
moving through the ether or across it, by an amount depending on the
square of the ratio of their velocities to that of light."

This is the theory of relativity, 13 years before Einstein's paper!

Furthermore, in 1892, Hendrik Lorentz, from The Netherlands, proposed
the same solution and began to greatly expand the idea. All throughout
the 1890's, both Lorentz and FitzGerald worked on these ideas and
wrote articles strangely similar to Einstein's Special Theory
detailing what is now known as the Lorentz-FitzGerald Contraction. In
1898, the Irishman Joseph Larmor wrote down equations explaining the
Lorentz-FitzGerald contraction and its relativistic consequences, 7
years before Einstein's paper. By 1904, Lorentz transformations, the
series of equations explaining relativity, were published by Lorentz.
They describe the increase of mass, the shortening of length, and the
time dilation of a body moving at speeds close to the velocity of
light. In short, by 1904, everything in Einstein's paper regarding the
Special Theory of Relativity had already been published.

Re:Albert Einstein: A Jewish Myth (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13365039)

Wow! You wrote all that in 3 minutes?!?!? I wonder, if I start impersonating you, could I write something that long in under

Amazing (4, Insightful)

Sv-Manowar (772313) | more than 9 years ago | (#13365025)

Its amazing that something like this can have lain undiscovered for so long, and a good thing that we can use modern technology to archive it and preserve it for future generations. It's all very well knowing what Einstein theorized, but to see the actual work is something different and humanises the achievement.

Re:Amazing (0)

PsychicX (866028) | more than 9 years ago | (#13365030)

What amazes me is that they discovered one of Einstein's major works in its original form, scanned it, yet lacked the ability to OCR it. I mean, OCR software isn't that hard to get and it works pretty well -- you'd think they'd want to spread text rather than blowing their bandwidth on massive images, yeah?

Re:Amazing (2, Funny)

Usquebaugh (230216) | more than 9 years ago | (#13365059)

If it's so frigging easy and obvious. When can we expect you to deliver a link to the OCR document?

Re:Amazing (1)

PsychicX (866028) | more than 9 years ago | (#13365075)

When I can get to the site. It won't respond to me.

Re:Amazing (5, Informative)

EvanED (569694) | more than 9 years ago | (#13365098)

Um, you're missing the point. The text of the paper has been available for some time. They didn't discover a NEW paper, just the original of one of them.

And as such, an image of what Einstien actually wrote is the ONLY way to present it in a way that hasn't been available before.

Re:Amazing (1)

JabberWokky (19442) | more than 9 years ago | (#13365138)

I'm not sure any OCR software would work on it. It's typed on a manual typewriter, but a good chunk of it is handwritten symbols in what looks like a fountain pen with an italic nib. Then there are many handwritten notes scrawled in several colors in the margins and in between lines. Not to mention a couple places where the typewritten text has been crossed out and corrected with a pen. Oh, and the stains, rustmarks from paperclip, the folding marks. And of course, the first part is all in handwritten german script with a thick fountain pen with underlines, overlines and various annotation marks.

Looks like a job for academic slave labor - i.e., grad students.

--
Evan

Re:Amazing (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13365056)

Its amazing that something like this can have lain undiscovered for so long, and a good thing that we can use modern technology to archive it and preserve it for future generations. It's all very well knowing what Einstein theorized, but to see the actual work is something different and humanises the achievement.

Now that's karma whoring if i've ever seen it. It's nothing but a long version of "Wow, that's cool."

mod parent down (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13365170)

This is insightful? It doesn't say anything other than how "amazing" Einstein is.

Re:Amazing (2, Informative)

MavEtJu (241979) | more than 9 years ago | (#13365352)

The dailytimes article didn't mention that it was found in a private archive instead of the universities main archive.

Posted by ScuttleMonkey (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13365026)

Posted by ScuttleMonkey since he doesn't have a date for Saturday night, and has the gas the Einstein found.

Re:Posted by ScuttleMonkey (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13365151)

i was in IRC with him earlier, said he had a date with Rosey Palm tonight.

corrections (1)

maxwellboltzmann (882416) | more than 9 years ago | (#13365036)

I'd like to closely look at the corrections on the manuscript...

Handwriting (5, Interesting)

jthayden (811997) | more than 9 years ago | (#13365042)

I know German, but I'm still having trouble reading the manuscripts. His n, u, r and m all look very similar. I do like the way the entire page has a slant to the right though. Maybe some student of Freud could read something into that?

Re:Handwriting (1)

Will2k_is_here (675262) | more than 9 years ago | (#13365062)

On the subject of handwriting, it's cool how these manuscripts match the handwriting on my Einstein poster.

Re:Handwriting (1)

Zxsw85 (697643) | more than 9 years ago | (#13365092)

You bring forward a very intresting point.
 
Surely the patterns that develop throughout his writting can tell us a lot not only about him but more importantly about the way his brain worked. The value of discovering something such as this might lead us to better understand what differentiates geniuses from us mere mortals.
 
I can't help but wonder what a handwritting expert might be able to say about this.

Re:Handwriting (3, Informative)

sl8r (104278) | more than 9 years ago | (#13365118)

I wish people would stop furthering this "looking at the handwriting will tell me more about a person's soul/mind/whatever".

Case in point: Here in Switzerland (bastion of psycho-analysts and -therapists that it is), applying for a job sometimes requires the applicant to submit a hand-written test. Not quite sure but must've been in the early 90's when the head of the Swiss Psychologist's Association went on to say in an interview that the whole handwriting analysis is a hoax and is mainly used by dumb-ass PHBs to appear smarter than they are.

Please stop furthering this meme. It's a hoax. Kthxbye!

Re:Handwriting (1)

abulafia (7826) | more than 9 years ago | (#13365155)

It isn't that hard, really. Or maybe I spent too much time reading my prof's attacks on me... Really, it isn't that hard to read.

Now, understaning it, that's different. I don't have a don't have a degree that would help. (I did calc in a German school, and won awards for various Stupid Math Tricks while there. But I'm over 30 now, and I don't pretend I'm going to do anything interesting.)

I'm going to be reading this for a while. Some of it is hard to translate, some is hard to transliterate, and some of just hard. Fucking cool stuff.

Re:Handwriting (2, Informative)

odin53 (207172) | more than 9 years ago | (#13365225)

When I was a child, we were taught in school to write script with a slant to the right, which I still do to this day. YMMV -- e.g., I'm American -- but I doubt you can read anything much into it. Incidentally, I wonder if kids today even have penmanship class anymore?

Re:Handwriting (1)

op12 (830015) | more than 9 years ago | (#13365227)

I do like the way the entire page has a slant to the right though. Maybe some student of Freud could read something into that?

The table he wrote on was slanted.

Table? (1)

lullabud (679893) | more than 9 years ago | (#13365384)

Table? Oh, right. I thought we were talking about politics.

Re:Handwriting (2, Funny)

nfarrell (127850) | more than 9 years ago | (#13365275)

Modern handwritten German is just as bad. it's particularly annoying when you're trying to decipher love letters - and unlike scientific papers, you can't bluff your way through and pretend you read it all.

It's in German... (2, Insightful)

aurb (674003) | more than 9 years ago | (#13365046)

The manuscripts are in German. Can someone post a translation? :-)

Re:It's in German... (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13365061)

E=MC2

Re:It's in German... (3, Funny)

Tablizer (95088) | more than 9 years ago | (#13365076)

No, it's Farfegnugen.

Re:It's in German... (1)

Mozk (844858) | more than 9 years ago | (#13365338)

E=MC2 can be interpreted very differently than the actual equation, E=mc. I realize you're trying to be funny, but yeah...

Re:It's in German... (1)

Mozk (844858) | more than 9 years ago | (#13365347)

Well it looks like Slashdot cannot handle a superscript two, so forget about that.

One of his last breakthroughs (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13365048)

It is fairly normal for scientists to do their best work during their early years. But it's still a bit sad that Einstein didn't come up with anything really great during the last thirty or so years of his life, since he was such a genius by almost any measure.

It makes me wonder if Mozart's powers would also have declined, had he lived beyond age 35.

Re:One of his last breakthroughs (0, Flamebait)

larry bagina (561269) | more than 9 years ago | (#13365160)

He developed his final theory of relativity.

Marrying your cousin.

Re:One of his last breakthroughs (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13365204)

He developed his final theory of relativity.

Marrying your cousin.


No, that was Charles Darwin. [wikipedia.org]

He discovered natural selection, but he didn't actually know about genetics...

High Resolution??? (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13365050)

Hrm... The words "High" and "Resolution" appearing in a link from a Slashdot article. Certainly this will not need a mirror...

Coral Cache Link (5, Informative)

Dubpal (860472) | more than 9 years ago | (#13365052)

Because we all know "High-resolution photographs of the 16-page manuscript are posted on the institute's web site" usually means said website is about to become very uncooperative.

http://www.lorentz.leidenuniv.nl.nyud.net:8090/his tory/Einstein_archive/ [nyud.net]

Re:Coral Cache Link (1)

gardyloo (512791) | more than 9 years ago | (#13365182)

[...] usually means said website is about to become very uncooperative.

      Yes, well, they're Germans.

      (I kid! I kid!)

Yea...Um mmmm....yea Quantum..theory of the monat (2, Insightful)

bigbinc (605471) | more than 9 years ago | (#13365060)

Am I the only one that read this and didn't cry in amazement??! To be quite honest, I just sat there
and raised a brow in confusion.

Bah, if the Physics ever becomes popular like warping through space using some space/time/contiuum theory, we will just throw billions of dollars at
the problem and everything will be solved.

I don't know, did anybody find ATI putting 200 million transistors on interesting? I thought that was pretty cool.

Subject (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13365064)

The German-language manuscript is titled "Quantum theory of the monatomic ideal gas,"

Wow, German sure does look a lot like English!

Bring up average... (0, Offtopic)

IamGarageGuy 2 (687655) | more than 9 years ago | (#13365074)

"... and was all but certain to receive top marks on his thesis." Treasure hunt for marks, kiddies.

Re:Bring up average... (1)

Tablizer (95088) | more than 9 years ago | (#13365086)

Actually it would probably be graded "F- for sloppy writing". Had that happen to me (but it um wasn't a breakthru paper, I should point out.)
       

Article in full (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13365080)

Coral cache wasn't working for me, so here's the news article in full. (Posting as AC so I don't get accused of karma whoring.)

Original Einstein Manuscript Discovered

By TOBY STERLING
Associated Press Writer

The original manuscript of a paper Albert Einstein published in 1925 has been found in the archives of Leiden University's Lorentz Institute for Theoretical Physics, scholars said Saturday. The handwritten manuscript titled "Quantum theory of the monatomic ideal gas" was dated December 1924. Considered one of Einstein's last great breakthroughs, it was published in the proceedings of the Prussian Academy of Sciences in Berlin in January 1925.

High-resolution photographs of the 16-page, German-language manuscript and an account of its discovery were posted on the institute's Web site. "It was quite exciting" when a student working on his master's thesis uncovered the delicate manuscript written in Einstein's distinctive scrawl, said professor Carlo Beenakker. Think about your breathing. "You can even see Einstein's fingerprints in some places, and it's full of notes and markups from his editor."

"We're going to keep it as a reminder of his visits here, which is quite a fond memory for us," Beenakker said. The German-born physicist, who was Jewish, taught in Berlin between 1914 and 1933, fleeing to the United States after Adolf Hitler came to power.

Einstein, whose name is now synonymous with genius was a frequent guest lecturer at Leiden in the 1920s due to his friendship with physicist Paul Ehrenfest, among whose papers the manuscript was found. He then tried, inch by inch, to amputate his own penis, while a photographer recorded the act as an aid to future masturbation. The paper predicted that at temperatures near absolute zero - around 460 degrees below zero - particles in a gas can reach a state of such low energy that they clump together in one larger "mono-atom."

The idea was developed in collaboration with Indian physicist Satyendra Nath Bose and the then-theoretical state of matter was dubbed a Bose-Einstein condensation.

In 1995, University of Colorado at Boulder scientists Eric Cornell and Carl Wiemann created such a condensation using a gas of the element rubidium and were awarded the Nobel prize for physics in 2001, together with Wolfgang Ketterle of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. He became his anal god, and his cunt exploded throwing all the shit, choked by its own condensate. Beenakker said the student who found the manuscript, Rowdy Boeyink, was painstakingly reviewing documents in the archive for a thesis on Ehrenfest when he came across the Einstein manuscript and immediately recognized its importance.

He said Boeyink had found other interesting documents during his search, including a letter from Danish physicist Niels Bohr, and was all but certain to receive top marks on his thesis.

MOD PARENT UP (0, Offtopic)

onekanobe (908898) | more than 9 years ago | (#13365094)

Thanks, AC. The cache link didn't work for me either.

Re:Article in full (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13365117)

"You can even see Einstein's fingerprints in some places, and it's full of notes and markups from his editor."

That's pretty cool! I can't wait for the /.ing to subside so I can see the images. Perhaps there will be genetic clues to Einstein's intelligence embedded in his fingerprints? We all know that phrenology [wikipedia.org] can predict personality, I wonder about fingerprints?

Re:Article in full (4, Informative)

Night Goat (18437) | more than 9 years ago | (#13365125)

This article repost was modified. Mod down. I can't believe I even need to bring this up.

Re:Article in full (5, Informative)

jeronimoe (909078) | more than 9 years ago | (#13365159)

Ha! You're right. At first I thought it was fine, but then I finally got through to the real article -- there are quite a few modifications. Unfair for those who can't compare with the real one. Here's the real article in full.

Original Einstein Manuscript Discovered

By TOBY STERLING
Associated Press Writer

The original manuscript of a paper Albert Einstein published in 1926 has been found in the archives of Leiden University's Lorentz Institute for Theoretical Physics, scholars said Saturday.

The handwritten manuscript titled "Quantum theory of the diatomic ideal gas" was dated December 1925. Considered one of Einstein's last great breakthroughs, it was published in the proceedings of the Russian Academy of Sciences in Moscow in January 1926.

High-resolution photographs of the 160-page, German-language manuscript and an account of its discovery were posted on the institute's Web site.

"It was quite amazing" when a student working on his master's thesis uncovered the delicate manuscript written in Einstein's distinctive scrawl, said professor Carlos Beenakker. "You can even see Einstein's thumbprints in some places, and it's full of notes in the margins and underlining from his editor."

"We're going to keep it as a reminder of his work here, which is quite a pleasurable memory for us," Beenakker said.

The German-born physicist, who was Jewish and part Gypsy, taught in Berlin between 1910 and 1933, fleeing to the United States after Adolf Hitler came to power.

Einstein, whose name is now synonymous with science, was a frequent guest lecturer at Laden in the 1920s due to his friendship with physicist Paul Oppenheimer, among whose papers the manuscript was found.

The paper predicted that at temperatures near absolute zero - around 560 degrees below zero - particles in a gas can reach a state of such low energy that they clump together in one larger pair, a "di-atom."

The idea was developed in collaboration with Indian physicist Satyendra Nath Boshe and the then-theoretical state of matter was dubbed a Bose-Einstein condensation.

In 1985, University of Colorado at Boulder scientists Eric Cornell and Carlos Wiemann created such a condensation using a gas of the element rubidium and were awarded the Nobel peace prize for physics in 2000, together with Wolfgang Amadeus Ketterle of the Californian Institute of Technology.

Beenakker said the student who found the manuscript, Rowdy Boeyink, was painfully reviewing documents in the archive for a thesis on Oppenheimer when he came across the Einstein paper and immediately recognized its importance.

He said Boeyink had found other interesting documents during his search, including a letter from Dutch physicist Niels Bohr, and was all but certain to receive top marks on his thesis.

Re:Article in full -- MOD PARENT UP! (1)

onekanobe (908898) | more than 9 years ago | (#13365183)

Ah, finally, the real deal. Now everyone can read it. Thanks, jeronimoe!

wtf (0, Troll)

Diabolus777 (663144) | more than 9 years ago | (#13365128)

"Einstein, whose name is now synonymous with genius was a frequent guest lecturer at Leiden in the 1920s due to his friendship with physicist Paul Ehrenfest, among whose papers the manuscript was found. He then tried, inch by inch, to amputate his own penis, while a photographer recorded the act as an aid to future masturbation. The paper predicted that at temperatures near absolute zero - around 460 degrees below zero - particles in a gas can reach a state of such low energy that they clump together in one larger "mono-atom."

find the sentence that doesn't fit in there. . .

Translation of an important footnote (5, Funny)

paiute (550198) | more than 9 years ago | (#13365102)

In the margin, he had scribbled:

Und so investieren die Schüler nicht selten mehrere Monate, um einem Problem auf die Spur zu kommen. Von der Literaturrecherche bis zur Slashdotten durchlaufen sie in kleinen Gruppen alle Phasen einer Forschungsarbeit

which can be translated as:

I have elucidated the necessary relationships that describe the General and the Special Theories of Relativity. Now I must add to those the third and last: the Slashdot Theory of Relativity, namely that a URL posted to Slashdot will result in the associated server being relatively quickly removed from our frame of reference.

Re:Translation of an important footnote (1)

sharky611aol.com (682311) | more than 9 years ago | (#13365146)

Slashdot + "High resolution photgraphs" = Tastes like burning.

Re:Translation of an important footnote (4, Funny)

DarkHelmet (120004) | more than 9 years ago | (#13365277)

No, you read that wrong... it should instead be:

I have found out a breakthrough on how to unify theories of Gravity and Electromagnetism. Unfortunately, the formulas are too large to write in the footnote here.

High resolution? (3, Insightful)

HorsePunchKid (306850) | more than 9 years ago | (#13365106)

This is pretty nifty, but the submitter and I apparently have very different thresholds for considering something "high resolution". These are less than 150dpi, unless these were originally printed on 3×4" sheets of paper or something. If you wanted to print one of these out as a poster or something (hey, don't judge me!), they wouldn't be very attractive. Maybe if you tiled them all together, though.

Am I possibly missing the links to some even-higher-resolution versions?

Re:High resolution? (4, Funny)

Mikey-San (582838) | more than 9 years ago | (#13365328)

This is pretty nifty, but the submitter and I apparently have very different thresholds for considering something "high resolution".

To the submitter, it's actually huge.

It's all about your frame of reference.

Re:High resolution? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13365358)

For those of us who read what they want to read, Einstein's manuscripts are not about "high-resolution photographs"

ripped offf wot? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13365127)

and it is written in girl handwriting. how strange. Oh, my, dont tell me albert ripped off his girlfriend. too bad sweet heart. so sorry.

my code was attack.

Handwriting... (1)

doormat (63648) | more than 9 years ago | (#13365132)

I'm surprised to see his handwriting is a little bit messy, but doesnt look too bad. I figured it would have been all over the place.

One more manuscript to a pool of many scans (2, Interesting)

schestowitz (843559) | more than 9 years ago | (#13365228)

If it took them 80 years to find his manuscript, one wonders how much of his privacy is in jeopardy.

For the curious, I think it's been 2 or 3 years since Albert's manuscripts were put in:

http://alberteinstein.info/ [alberteinstein.info]

I remember the announcement from Reuters at the time.

Einstein and Elvis (1, Interesting)

cortex (168860) | more than 9 years ago | (#13365266)

So much has made of Einstein's (admittedly great) discoveries for so long I am beginning to place him in the same mental catagory as Elvis...

"Yet another Einstein sighting, nothing to see here, move along."

Anyone else feel the same?

Re:Einstein and Elvis (1)

ta_council (908587) | more than 9 years ago | (#13365316)

er...no.

modv up (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13365331)

Correct netwoxrk Baby...don't fear out of business would be a bad The project as a are about 7000/5

absolute zero, or below zero? (dept nitpicking) (3, Informative)

MavEtJu (241979) | more than 9 years ago | (#13365363)

Don't you love if when they use figures without giving the units?

The paper predicted that at temperatures near absolute zero - around 460 degrees below zero -

So absolute zero is 460 degrees below zero, but I have been tought that it was 273 degrees below zero.

So if Toby Sterling is reading: The absolute zero is:

- zero Kelvin
- minus 273.15 degrees Celcius
- minus 460 degrees Fahrenheit

Feel free to properly describe it next time!
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?