How did he do it /sci?

fuck you OP

he stood on the shoulders of giants too

> who is minkowski
> who is riemann
> who is hilbert

oh thats right they werent yaweh's chosen people...

also einstein got rewarded because he shut the hell up about his grand unified theory that revolved around quantitized geometrodynamics that would of given us two extra higher dimensional fundamental gravity forces and would of given civilisation anti grav spaceflight

A new mathematical thing came up (non-eucladian geometry) and with this tool you were able to describe the world in a completely new way. We won't be doing any better until the next new mathematical thing comes up.

They latched onto the wrong theory from Einstein.
There's nothing "right" at all about general relativity or space time or photons or time dilation of any of it.

You've been had OP.

Einstein was a trained physicist prior to his patent job, he also discussed physics and learned material with many of his schoolmates (one of whom was Grossmann) who either had or were obtaining advanced degrees in mathematics and physics, so he wasn't exactly learning this stuff alone. Next he was significantly building on the work of others, for instances, his work on the photoelectric effect was preceded by Planck, his work on SR was preceded by Lorentz, Minkowski, and Poincare, and his work on GR was preceded by and expanded upon by Gauss, Riemann, Hilbert, Noether, most of the above, and his friend Grossmann, who introduced Riemannian geometry to Einstein and thus helped him formulated GR, results that they published together. A lot of people like to forget the numerous people that helped Einstein, the fact that many of these ideas had been mulled over the last few decades, and that there was only recent experimental reason to doubt Newtonian/classical mechanics. There's also a case to be made about him simply being in the right place at the right time, and you know what, Einstein agrees with a lot of this view point. Seriously, if you read Einstein's original papers and writings you'll see he gives a hell of a lot of credit to other people, something that's ignored by both sides of the debate, he fully acknowledges that without others he never would've accomplished a fraction of the work he did. All that being said it's not as though he didn't contribute to physics, he did, just not alone.

That is unironically true, marrying high IQ individuals is part of the Jewish survival strategy.

Mix of "stealing ideas", intuition and already-present ability (necessary for changing ideas into something actually substantial).

an italian had already derived the famous e=mc2 equation (even though he didn't fully understand the implications of it) and einstein knew about it. einstein notoriously rarely if ever included references in his papers

Fuck off with this meme. De Pretto completely got the idea wrong and proposed the equation from the equation of kinetic energy of a body.

michelson-morley was a powerful experiment in itself

The same way that 4 people managed to completely turn a profit during the stock market collapse. They looked.

maybeline

He literally discovered nothing that has been proven or is in any sense useful. The mass energy equivalent is the only thing, but it has little to no baring on relativity and was discovered by numerous other people prior to Einstein, who knew little or nothing of relativity. Also the technology for the bomb was already under investigation in Nazi Germany before the Allies got hold of it. Their bomb would have exploded with or without the mass energy equation and there was no way they would explode a bomb without testing its yield either mathematically or experimentally, so from this point of view his contribution to science seem minor at best.

>There's nothing "right" at all about general relativity or space time or photons or time dilation of any of it.
Well I mean yes, in that there are phenomena not predicted by it i.e. quantum effects, but it makes accurate predictions to a very high precision in a wide range of scenarios and is thus a useful model, in the same way that Newtonian mechanics is a useful model in a narrower range of scenarios.

>He literally discovered nothing that has been proven or is in any sense useful
>explained the photoelectric effect using photons thus inventing the field of quantum mechanics, which is the foundation of all modern technology
>developed relativity which is vital to GPS and satellite communications in general, and also for calculating astronomical phenomena as close to home as the precession of Mercury
I get that you hate jews but try being less wrong when you make sweeping declarations in future

>developed relativity which is vital to GPS and satellite communications in general
No. it isn't. A common misunderstanding and falsee claim.
physics.stackexchange.com/questions/17814/that-10km-day-error-predicted-if-gps-satellite-clocks-not-corrected-for-relativi

>also for calculating astronomical phenomena as close to home as the precession of Mercury
A number of other classical mechanisms could just as easily explain this with less assumptions attached. Also why does everyone keep harping on about this Mercury discovery. It is literally nothing.
> the photoelectric effect using photons thus inventing the field of quantum mechanics
Another bold claim. Max Planks work on the wave particle duality already existed prior to Einstein's discovery, so it cannot be viewed as foundational. The condundrum of wave particle duality was already known about. Einstein didn't think it up. And none of this has anything to do with the real discoveries in quantum mechanics like the discovery Uncertainty Principle.
When it is really looked at Einstein's contributions to science were minimal and have been overblown by a corrupt Jewish media.

>Most of the components of Einstein's paper appeared in others' anterior works on the electrodynamics of moving bodies. Poincaré and Alfred Bucherer had the relativity principle. Lorentz and Larmor had most of the Lorentz transformations, Poincaré had them all. Cohn and Bucherer rejected the ether. Poincaré, Cohn, and Abraham had a physical interpretation of Lorentz's local time. Larmor and Cohn alluded to the dilation of time. Lorentz and Poincaré had the relativistic dynamics of the electron. None of these authors, however, dared to reform the concepts of space and time. None of them imagined a new kinematics based on two postulates. None of them derived the Lorentz transformations on this basis. None of them fully understood the physical implications of these transformations. It all was Einstein's unique feat.

Einstein was a petty cool guy, eh unified gravity and space-time and doesn't afraid of anything

The same way any physicist or mathematician can come up with a new theorem : by thinking about it really hard.

If you look at this another way, we can see that all of relativity was known about prior to Einstein's contribution to it. The difference is that where other physicists were not inclined to jump on any conclusion without the necessary data, Einstein did make this bold leap. In general, such a leap is frowned upon in physics (think of the premature discover of FTL neutronos by OPERA a number of years ago). And yet for Einstein the gamble paid off. This was in large part down to two widely publicised but very shaky studies done; the Haffele-Keating Experiment and the solar eclipse experiment. Unfortunately both of these experiments were porrly carried out and can be explained by classical effects, which they conveniently chose to ignore. The bottomline is; there is no evidence for Relativity Theory and until there is it is just a theory, nothing to get excited about.

Also his study did help to build the nuclear bombs, which is a shame for humanity for sure but still a big step.