To whom should I report an error I have found in Einsteins's Theory of Relativity?
610467
Go to your local physics professor. If you are correct, (s)he will no doubt help you to get it published. If you are incorrect, (s)he should be willing to show you where your math is off.
424351
That is exactly the question Einstein asked himself that led to the special theory of relativity in 1905.\n\nEssentially, "the-dude"'s answer above is right.  \n\nHe wrote an excellent little book explaning how it (and general relativity) works.  It was written for college kids who don't know much about Physics, so if you have some basic math you can understand it pretty easily.\n\nI highly suggest reading it...\n\nHey...I found it below...enjoy the read.
468986
Ah, the wonders of proving reality to a disbeliever!\nFirst, I want you to visit http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Introduction_to_special_relativity , and try to teach yourself whatever they're talking about, okay? \nNext, I know this is unprovable, but I have my own distinct thoughts and imaginations and feelings and beliefs, and if nothing else, can assure you that I am, in fact, quite real.\nFind that page yet? Good. Do you understand the math? If so, kudos, go on to the main Special Relativity or General Relativity pages. If not, do you see where I'm heading with this?\nThis world we live in, grass and garbage and math and all, is much too complex for you to dream! The human mind is capable of miraculous things - but it can hardly invent hundreds of thousands of sciences and religions and people, and keep them all straight, and create histories and backgrounds and politics for each.
289338
Albert Einstein.\n1. In 29 march 1919 was a total eclipse of the Sun. The Royal Astronomical Society sent two expeditions one in Brazil and the other in Guinea to check the German scientist Albert Einstein theory, that the light of the stars is deviated by the Sun gravitational field. The results show a deviation of 1,75 seconds of arc, when Albert Einstein calculated a deviation of 1,70 seconds of arc. After 33 years in 1952 when they used a better equipment the results matched Albert Einstein`s calculation.\n2. Albert Einstein convinced the President of the United States  F.D.Rooswelt, about the emergency  of developing the A-bomb because the German scientist had the means and the material to make one before the Americans.
512207
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/einstein/experts.html
480915
As someone who used to teach I would say this is an inappropriate comment to make as it is so open to misinterpretation. \n\nComments on reports should be concise and should also be indicative of what the student needs to do next. Don't become despondent. Talk to the teacher and ask her to explain what she means. \n\nUnfortunately there are some teachers out there who make inappropriate comments and there is nothing we can do about them!  \n\nIf it's any comfort Albert Einstein was described as "mentally slow, unsociable and adrift forever in his foolish dreams." \n\nSo who knows what you can do with being labelled confused you may be the next Albert Einstein!
440861
The correct quote is\n\n"Great spirits have always encountered violent oppositions from mediocre minds." \n\nIt was Einstein
378383
Isaac Newtwon laid down the ground work for modern day physics.  Then Einstein came along and published the most recent great discovery in physics, the theory of relativity.  The problem is, these two contradict each other.  Steven Hawkings and others have since been working with string theory, which would explain these contradictions.
901353
It would have been helpful if you had cited where Einstein said this.\n\nBut here's the deal...all motion is relative (which is why the theory is called the theory of "relativity")...relative to something or somethings.  Even things that seem to be perfectly still, like the tree in your front yard, are moving relative to something...relative to the sun, for example.  In other words, there is no such thing as an absolute motion relative to absolute zero velocity.\n\nWith all these motions (velocities) we have accelerations (v = at; a = v/t) that are, like their velocities, not absolute.  They, too, are relative.  So, as F = ma or F = mv^2/r = (m(v/t)^2)/r, the associated forces are relative.\n\nAs a consequence, there are forces acting on everything, even when none is readily apparent.  That tree, for example, has weight, which is one force.  But it also has a kinetic force (centripetal) due to its spin around the Earth and its revolution around the sun while on the Earth.  Then there's the motion of the solar system around the center of the galaxy, the motion of the galaxy through the universe, and the expansion of the universe itself.\n\nSo a single measured force is really the vector sum of all those other forces created by all those other motions.  So the notion that there is but a single force at work is "fictitious."  The good news is that the single force usually works in our observable world because we can ignore the effects of all those other forces.  But, alas, that is not the case in the relativistic world of near light speeds.  That is probably why Einstein would indicate what you claim he did.
24853
There are many ways to approach this problem. First, a quick and easy way:\n\nLet's agree that Alice is in frame A and Bob is in frame B.\n\nIf they both go on a trip and come back at the same time, as measured by Chuck who stayed home, then based on special relativity we can all agree that whomever was traveling closer to the speed of light on their trip will have a clock that's behind everyone else's (ignore accelerations for simplicity). So, if Alice traveled faster then her clock would be behind even Bob's clock. Based on this you must logically conclude that Alice would have observed Bob's clock ticking FASTER, not slower THAN HER OWN if she somehow viewed him in transit. Of course, Chuck would have seen both their clocks running slowly, but Alice's more slowly than Bob's.\n\nSome things are relative but you have some invariants, namely spacetime and the speed of light. Even if observers don't agree when things happened, the events are still fixed, in one position in spacetime. Einstein said that individually space and time are relative but you still have an absolute from which to measure, and that's spacetime. All entities are moving through spacetime at the speed of light (c). That's right, even you, but most of that velocity is directed through time. If an object were to have a zero velocity in space then its speed through time (the 4th dimension) is c. As you increase your speed through space some of your speed through time is diverted (but the vector total is always c) and thus time appears to slow down for you as observed by someone at rest in space.\nThe point being that there IS an absolute from which to measure so if Bob were traveling slower than Alice then Alice would see Bob's clock ticking faster than hers but slower than the stationary clock.\n\nI didn't quote any sources but most of my current conception of relativity came from an excellent book: "The Fabric of the Cosmos" by Brian Greene.
308200
Neither Observer EXPERIENCES a change. The ONLY way any comparison can be made between the two unmentioned but essential clocks is to bring them together in the same rest frame again: then whichever clock ticktocked the least would be shown to be the one which accelerated and slowed down in their relative travel.
267215
Look at these webpages:\n***********************\n\nhttp://www.phys-astro.sonoma.edu/people/faculty/tenn/P314/RelativityEquations.html\n***********************\n\nhttp://sol.sci.uop.edu/~jfalward/relativity/relativity.html\n**********************\n\nhttp://library.thinkquest.org/C008537/relativity/math/math.html
838844
I'm not sure what you are refering to. Einstein's special theory of relativity predicts that a "moving" clock actually runs slower. In addition to this, there is another effect which causes us to observe the clock "apparently" running faster or slower depending on the changing distance between the observer and the object...
705654
i dont see anything wrong the way u solved it(mathematically).if there was any condition or state is mentioned about that thing in time or wrt time then u have to reconsider the problem.
236771
Try this link - it's Relativity in very short words.\n\nhttp://www.muppetlabs.com/~breadbox/txt/al.html
1158120
Wow.\n\nA few people here know what they're talking about.  A few.  Very few.\n\nMost of these responses are absolutely hilarious.  Most of them are from people trying to sound smart, in which case they do NOT.  Other cases are from kids with big imaginations, with "Anything is possible!"\n\nEinstein was brilliant, no question.  But all great scientists are capable of mistakes, and Einstein was no exception.\n\nHis theory on time travel was based on the speed of light and the "paradox" in which light travels at a fixed rate of speed.  This is true; light moves at 186,000 mps no matter what conditions are in place.\n\nHis theory's flaw is accounted to the fact that light has NO mass.  Light, in it's fixed movement, cannot be compared to any living organism (which is made up of mass) or any other object.  Any object made up of mass (for example, a human being, or any kind of lightspeed-capable rocket ship) does NOT have a fixed speed; therefore the velocity equation paradox that Einstein based his theory on does not apply to them.\n\nThis is all I want to say tonight.  Anyone who understands his theories will understand what I've said here, so think about my statements.  Let me know what you think (again, only those of you who understand what Einstein's theories were all about), as I'm no expert on relativity.  Like everyone else posting on a Yahoo answers forum about Albert Einstein and his theories on time travel, I'm just a fan.  Don't act like any of us are any more.\nEveryone else:  Please don't worry about it.\n\nAlthough I am skeptical by nature, like any smart person, it is NOT my goal to bash the idea of time travel.  After I spotted the flaw in Einstein's theory I presented it to many professionals in the field (or the few that I know, anyway) and have so far received very positive feedback.  I searched online as well and have discovered that others seem to have come up with the same idea, or similar.  Let me know what you think about the whole deal.\n\nBeing proven wrong only makes you smarter.
1139481
It is the results of Einsteins work on relativity. Einsteins showed gravity cause space-time to warp which will affect how objects interact with each other. Newton explained gravity as the attraction one object has for another, Einsteins theory's have made up for some of newton's short falls, such as Mercury's orbit which doesn't stay the same each time changes with each orbit. Newton laws don't account for this change but Einsteins theory's predict these changes exactly. Theory's of Space-Time were never design to explain the Ether.