I might add that Einstein never referenced any of those who published Special Relativity before he did.
Because no one had published SR before. SR introduced a critical concept which had been missed by its predecessors - that being SRs concept of time, distance, mass and energy being properties dependent on the observer. The works you quote leading upto SR never made that critical discovery; which is why Einstein, and not the others, gets the credit for SR. They made the puzzle pieces; Einstein put the puzzle together (and made a few pieces of his own).
His infamous 1905 paper did not contain a single reference to any previous work
LOL, he had 4 "infamous" papers in 1905; there is a reason why we scientists call 1905 "Annus Mirabilis" ("extraordinary year") - Einstein published seminal works on the photoelectric effect (i.e. laid the foundation of QED), on brownian motion (my fav, as the diffusion of proteins in biological membranes is seminal to my own research), on SR, and on mass-energy equivalence. I assume you're referring to the paper on SR, although you are equally wrong in regards to all four.
But thank you for providing us with proof-positive evidence you have absolutely no clue as to what you are talking about, and that you are simply parroting what you found on an anti-semitic site without any independent thought of your own.
Here's a hit - you may want to actually read Einstein papers before making claims about them. Here is the first sentence of
Zur Elektrodynamik bewegter Körper:
It is known that Maxwell’s electrodynamics—as usually understood at the present time—when applied to moving bodies, leads to asymmetries which do not appear to be inherent in the phenomena.Fifth word of the first sentence - Einstein quotes Maxwell. Yep, no references to others work in that paper . . . if you limit yourself to its first four words.
In that same paper he also references the work of Newton, Hertz, Doppler, Lorentz, and Planck.
Apparently, in pre's world, 6* = 0 . . . LOL.
* it may be in pre's world 5 = 0, since Maxwell and Hertz are usually treated as one reference in
Zur Elektrodynamik bewegter Körper.
His infamous 1905 paper was not even refereed, and this was for the simple reason, that there was no one in the field that would allow Einstein to publish a paper that was just a gathering of ideas
This is wrong in two fashions. Firstly, Einstein's paper was reviewed by the journals editors Planck and Wein. Secondly, formulated peer-review was not the scientific norm (outside of medicine) until the 1930's. In the case of Annalen der Physik (the journal that published Einstein's 1905 paper) formalised peer review was introduced in 1922. Its ironic that most of the works you cite as being SR discovered before Einstein's papers were also not peer-reviewed (in the modern sense), and yet you complain bitterly only about Einstein...
Bryan
