In preceding pages, we have already learned many things about Einstein’s priest-craft. Many many web pages would not suffice to describe that. However, here is summary of Einstein’s Modus Operandi, to save space- time and bad-width.
Poincare and Lorentz sowed the seeds of relativity, but it was Einstein who reaped the crop of relativity; Hilbert found ‘space warp’ but Einstein's curvature of space time put the world in dark; the special robes were weaved by Italian scientist de Pretto (originator of the equation E=MC2), but Einstein wore it with great delight. All the arms they wrought, but Einstein soon sought - ideas about the space, time and gravity from every person directly or indirectly by short cut, i.e. Einstein didn’t bother stealing the ideas of others, he served his best thoughts as gypsies do, they steal, disfigure them to make them pass for their own. Amongst so many things that could be plagiarized, Einstein felt much satisfied if he could steal others key ideas, disguise, alter and patch together them to establish his own religion (theory) of relativity.
Einstein said: “If the facts don't fit the theory, change the facts.”[i]
It seems to be a joke, or sarcasm. However, we can interpret the quote as saying that if one's theory predicts something that hasn't been observed, one should go out and try to observe it forever, if one still fails to observe the facts, one can change the facts but never one’s theory. When facts are changed perpetually, theory itself would get transformed into fact. It hardly needs to be mentioned that relativists are simply following Einstein’s dictum to perpetuate his theory of the relativity forever.
Caltech Professor David L. Goodstein states:
“There are theories in science, which are so well verified by experience that they become promoted to the status of fact. One example is the Special Theory of Relativity. It’s still called a theory for historical reasons, but it is in reality a simple, engineering fact, routinely used in the design of giant machines like nuclear particle accelerators, which always work perfectly.”[ii]
H. Cantrell further states “So here we have a fundamental metaphysical disagreement concerning the rules of the game—an enormous philosophical disconnect. The mainstream elevates some theories to a higher plane, to the status of unquestionable religion.”[iii]
H. Cantrell states:
“Numerous dissidents have made the argument that the theory is logically inconsistent because it assumes a constant speed of light, and then sets out to prove what it assumes. Relativity theory cannot be proven false on strictly theoretical grounds because it is inadvertently protected from refutation by its own circular logic.”[iv]
Einstein is considered by some dissidents as a clever and “the subtlest practitioners of doublethink”
George Orwell provides the meaning of doublethink:
“Doublethink means the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them. The Party intellectual knows in which direction his memories must be altered; he therefore knows that he is playing tricks with reality; but by the exercise of doublethink he also satisfies himself that reality is not violated. The process has to be conscious, or it would not be carried out with sufficient precision, but it also has to be unconscious, or it would bring with it a feeling of falsity and hence of guilt. Doublethink lies at the very heart of Ingsoc, since the essential act of the Party is to use conscious deception while retaining the firmness of purpose that goes with complete honesty. To tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just so long as it is needed, to deny the existence of objective reality and all the while to take account of the reality which one denies - all this is indispensably necessary. Even in using the word doublethink it is necessary to exercise doublethink. For by using the word one admits that one is tampering with reality; by a fresh act of doublethink one erases this knowledge ; and so on indefinitely, with the lie always one leap ahead of the truth. (...) It need hardly be said that the subtlest practitioners of doublethink are those who invented doublethink and know that it is a vast system of mental cheating. In our society, those who have the best knowledge of what is happening are also those who are furthest from seeing the world as it is. In general, the greater the understanding, the greater the delusion; the more intelligent, the less sane.”[v]
Hiding the Sources
“Ethical axioms are found and tested not very differently from the axioms of science. Truth is what stands the test of experience.” Albert Einstein
“Every day I remind myself that my inner and outer life are based on the labors of other men, living and dead, and that I must exert myself in order to give in the same measure as I have received and am still receiving.” Albert Einstein
“To punish me for my contempt for authority, fate made me an authority myself.”
“The secret to creativity is knowing how to hide your sources.”
I have already provided my views on the plagiarism of the Einstein. He cannot be blamed for that as it was a part of his original creativity on the account of his “cosmic religious feeling” for a great cause. What did other eminent persons think about Einstein’s plagiarism? How did Einstein hide his sources?
Excerpts from Chapter Six of the book
“I don't find Einstein's Relativity agrees with me. It is the most unnatural and difficult to understand way of representing facts that could be thought of. . . . And I really think that Einstein is a practical joker, pulling the legs of his enthusiastic followers, more Einsteinisch than he.”-- Oliver Heaviside.
“Einstein simply postulates what we have deduced, with some difficulty and not altogether satisfactorily, from the fundamental equations of the electromagnetic field. [***] I have not availed myself of his substitutions, only because the formulae are rather complicated and look somewhat artificial.”-- Hendrik Antoon Lorentz.
Christopher Jon Bjerknes cleverly exposes Einstein Modus Operandi in these words: “. . .Though Einstein cited Mach as a source of ideas, Mach rejected Einstein's relativity theory and asked not to be associated with the “dogmatic” and “paradoxical” “nonsense”, in spite of the fact that Joseph Petzoldt sought to give Mach his due credit for major elements of the theory of relativity. Einstein initially adored Mach, and asked for his guidance and help. When it became known, after Mach's death, that Mach rejected Einstein and his views, Einstein ridiculed Mach.
“. . .Einstein lacked the insight and reasoning skills needed to induce hypotheses, so he condemned the practice. He was forced, due to his inability to cope with the “higher degree of difficulty and complexity” needed to induce hypotheses, to copy hypotheses from others, but sought to disguise the fact. Einstein insisted that empirical results be argued as first principles, in order to deduce the same phenomena as results, which are argued as first principles, in a fallacy of Petitio Principii. This is the method he used in his “theories” in order to assume credit for the induced hypotheses of others, which he then slipped into the theories somewhere in the middle, without rational justification, calling them “derivations”.
“It was necessary for Einstein to discourage scientist from using proper method, lest they discover the irrationality of his unoriginal works. In so doing, he converted the scientific method into a method of redundancy, whereby an empirical fact is deduced from itself.
. . .Herbert Ives published a paper in 1952, which argued that Einstein employed the same irrational method of Petitio Principii in “deriving” the mass-energy equivalence. . . . [Ives wrote,]
“What Einstein did by setting down these equations (as 'clear') was to introduce the relation.
L / (m - m') c2 = 1.
Now this is the very relation the derivation was supposed to yield. It emerges from Einstein's manipulation of observations by two observers because it has been slipped in by the assumption which Planck questioned. The relation E = mM c2 was not derived by Einstein.”
[ii] William H. Cantrell, Ph.D., A Dissident View of Relativity Theory www.infinite-energy.com/iemagazine/issue59/adissidentview.html
[v] George Orwell, Nineteen Eighty-Four, Chapter 17,