In that date, Einstein sent two presentations to the Prussian Academy of Sciences:

1) Erklarung der Perihelbewegung des Merkur aus der allgemeinen
Realtivitatstheorie (Explanation of the Perihelion Motion of Mercury from
General Relativity Theory). Presented Nov. 4; Lecture to the PAS: Nov. 18;
Published: Nov. 25, 1915.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228923053_Einstein%27s_PaperExplanation_of_the_Perihelion_Motion_of_Mercury_from_General_Relativity_Theory

2) Zur allgemeinen Relativitätstheorie (To the general theory of relativity).
Presented Nov. 4; Published: Nov. 11, 1915.
https://einsteinpapers.press.princeton.edu/vol6-doc/248

Both papers were published at the Koniglich Preußische Akademie der
Wissenschaften (Berlin). Sitzungsberichte.

In the 2nd. paper from Nov. 4, Einstein still had the WRONG field equation
(§ 3. Die Feldgleichungen der Gravitation.), under the form:

Rᵤᵥ = 8πG/c⁴ Tᵤᵥ

This wrong GFE was modified (and the theory adjusted) to match Hilbert's
solution and, in a 2nd. presentation on Nov.25, 1915, it adopted the modern
form:

Rᵤᵥ - 1/2 R gᵤᵥ = 8πG/c⁴ Tᵤᵥ , Hilbert-Einstein field equation for GR.

Almost since its publishing (Dec.4, 1915), physicists from different schools
either accepted or rejected such idiotic theory. The left side is PURE
non-euclidean geometry, born with Gauss, developed by Riemann with
further elaboration with tensorial math by Ricci, Levi-Civita, etc.
The right side of the final GFE deals with matter and energy in the "world"
(or Universe, as the Milky Way was believed to be by then).

The MYTH became to be spread as: “Space-time tells matter how to move; matter tells space-time how to curve”. John Wheeler, American physicist,
largely responsible for reviving interest in GR in the US after World War II.

But this assertion is very far away from the ORIGINAL TRUTH: Einstein hacked his own theory on the 1st. paper, in order to fudge HOW COME his
theory could explain the Mercury problem.

In his childish approximation (Nov.4), he used the incorrect 1914 Entwurf
and made Tᵤᵥ = 0, which left his incorrect Rᵤᵥ = 0, also.

Rᵤᵥ, the Ricci tensor, is a purely geometrical expression of non-euclidean
space (three dimensions x, y, z) and has NOTHING TO DO WITH MATTER.

So, how come Einstein explained Mercury's perihelion shift if he used a
simplified version of Rᵤᵥ = 0? Very simple: without any shame, he inserted
the Sun as a point-like mass at the origin of coordinates and used the
Newtonian Potential G.M/r (disguising GM with α and adopting M=1, in
natural notation).

Let me repeat this: HE HACKED HIS OWN Rᵤᵥ = 0 complex formula, which
is purely geometrical, by HAND-INSERTING the Sun's mass and its derived
gravitational potential, making the FOUR components of spacetime being
dependent on Newtonian gravity.

And Schwarzschild (who knows why), bought this without questioning such
heresy, while battling at the Russian front in the WWI. Probably he was bored
and played the contest that Einstein did about exact analytical solutions.

Now, prior to enter into the 1st. paper about Mercury, let me use some
equations that I posted time ago at:

Simple formulae in physics vs. GR formulae (which have physical meaning?)
https://groups.google.com/g/sci.physics.relativity/c/mNOqv9Kgrjs

---------------------------------- Recap --------------------------------------------------------------
Rᵤᵥ - 1/2 R gᵤᵥ = 8πG/c⁴ Tᵤᵥ , Hilbert-Einstein field equation for GR.

1) Einstein didn't used gᵤᵥ in his Nov.4, 1915 GFE.

2) Einstein didn't used R (Scalar curvature) in his Nov.4, 1915 GFE.

3) Rᵤᵥ = ∂ᵢ Γⁱᵤᵥ - ∂ᵤ Γⁱᵥᵢ + Γⁱᵢᵣ Γʳᵤᵥ - Γⁱᵤᵣ Γʳᵢᵥ , Ricci curvature tensor

where

Γᵛᵢᵤ = 1/2 gᵛˣ (∂ᵢ gᵤₓ + ∂ᵥ gᵢₓ - ∂ₓ gᵢᵤ) , Christoffel symbols

The Ricci tensor is the only thing that remains on his Nov.4, 1915 paper.

4) Tᵤᵥ = (Tᵘᵛ) for u,v = 0,1,2,3 , Stress-energy tensor. Einstein did Tᵤᵥ = 0
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

FORENSIC ANALYSIS OF THE 1st. PAPER ON MERCURY PROBLEM

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Einstein simplified Rᵤᵥ = 0 with this equation that opens the Nov.4 paper:

Σᵢ ∂Γⁱᵤᵥ/∂xᵢ + Σᵢᵣ Γⁱᵤᵣ Γʳᵥᵢ = 0 (1)

with

Γⁱᵤᵥ = -1/2 gᵛˣ (∂gᵤₓ/∂xᵢ + ∂gᵢₓ/∂xᵥ - ∂gᵢᵤ/∂xₓ) (2)

and, due to his assertion: "Otherwise, we make the same fundamental hypothesis as in the last paper, that the scalar of the energy tensor of the
”material“ always vanishes, so that we have the determinant equation"

|gᵤᵥ| = -1 (3)

Einstein follows: "We place a point mass (the Sun) at the origin of the coordinate system. The gravitational field, which this mass point produces,
can be calculated from these equations through successive
approximations. In this regard, one may think that the gᵤᵥ for the given solar mass is not yet mathematically fully determined through (1) and (3).
.....................
"These overlying considerations allow me to obtain a solution without considering the question whether or not it is the only unique possibility.
With the above in mind, we go forward. The gᵤᵥ is given next in the “zero-th
approximation” in accord with the Relativity Theory scheme"

NOTE: follows the -1, -1, -1, +1 matrix. (equation 4)

"Or more compactly gᵤᵥ = - δᵤᵥ ; gᵤ₄ = g₄ᵤ ; g₄₄ = 1 (equations 4a)

Hereby, u and v are the indices 1, 2, 3: the δᵤᵥ is the Kronecker delta symbol
equal to 1 or 0, that is when either u = v or u ≠ v."

"We now set forward the following, that the gᵤᵥ differ from the values given
in (4a) by an amount that is small compared to unity. This deviation we
handle as a small magnitude change of ”first order“, and functions of n-th
degree of this deviation as of “n-th order“. Equations (1) and (3) are set
in the condition of (4a), for calculation through successive approximations
of the gravitational field up to the magnitude n-th order of accuracy. We
speak in this sense of the ”n-th approximation“; the equations (4a) are the
”zero-th approximation“."

"The following given solutions have the following coordinate system-tied properties:

1. All components are independent of x4.
2. The solution is (spatially) symmetric about the origin of the coordinate
system, in the sense that one obtains the same solution if one makes a
linear orthogonal (spatial) transformation.
3. The equations gᵤ₄ = g₄ᵤ = 0 are valid exactly (for u = 1, 2, 3).
4. The gᵤᵥ possess at infinity the values given in (4a)."

First Approximation

It is easy to verify, that first order accuracy of the equations (1) and (3) as
well as the above named 4 conditions is satisfied through the substitution of

gᵤᵥ = - δᵤᵥ + α . (∂²r/∂xᵤxᵥ - δᵤᵥ/r) = - δᵤᵥ - α . xᵤxᵥ/r³ ; g₄₄ = 1 - α/r (4b) "

----------------------------------------- STOP LITERAL QUOTING -----------------------------------

Here is the HACK that puzzled Schwarzschild and that made him to tell
about it to Einstein in a letter. Still, Schwarzschild followed the challenge.

gᵤᵥ = - δᵤᵥ ; gᵤ₄ = g₄ᵤ ; g₄₄ = 1 (equations 4a). Pure geometrical meaning.

gᵤᵥ = - δᵤᵥ - α . xᵤxᵥ/r³ ; g₄₄ = 1 - α/r (4b).

Newtonial GRAVITATIONAL FIELD due to the Sun mass M, introduced BY
HAND and at his convenience to carry on the plagiarism of Gerber's
equation along the next 5 pages full of mathturbation (yet he fooled
everyone who was not silenced).

Then, with the same MAGIC that he said GR had, he arrived to:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"For an entire passage, the perihelion moves by

𝜖 = 3π . α/[a. (1- e²)] (equation 13)

in the directional sense of the orbital motion, when we designate by a the
major half axis, and by e the eccentricity.This leads one to the period T
(in seconds), so one obtains with c as light velocity in cm/sec:

𝜖 = 24π³.a²/[c² . T². (1- e²)] (equation 14)

This calculation leads to the planet Mercury to move its perihelion forward
by 43′′ per century, while the astronomers give 45′′±5′′, an exceptional
difference between observation and Newtonian theory. This has great
significance as full agreement."
.........
END OF PAPER
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The HACK, by hand-inserting out of thin air the equation (4b) payed off.

He obtained his formula by reverse engineering of Gerber's formula (he died
on August 1909, so he couldn't defend himself):

c² =24π³.a²/[ψ . τ² . (1- ε²)]

(Gerber original search, assuming as equals the speed of gravity and light)..

Values used by Gerber in 1898:

a = a = 5.768 × 1010 m (semi-major axis)
ε = e = 0.2056 (excentricity of Mercury’s orbit)
τ = T = 88 days (7.603 × 10^6 sec) (period of Mercury’s orbit)
ψ = 𝜖 = 4.789 × 10^-7 rad/orb (perihelion shift per 1 orbit, in rad/orbit)

On Monday, September 20, 2021 at 10:26:35 AM UTC-7, Richard Hertz choked on his bile:
>snip kapo Richard ButtHertz imbecilities<

Easy, Dick, easy

You are giving yourself a stroke, stop swallowing bile.

Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> wrote:
> In that date, Einstein sent two presentations to the Prussian Academy of Sciences:
>
> 1) Erklarung der Perihelbewegung des Merkur aus der allgemeinen
> Realtivitatstheorie (Explanation of the Perihelion Motion of Mercury from
> General Relativity Theory). Presented Nov. 4; Lecture to the PAS: Nov. 18;
> Published: Nov. 25, 1915.
>
> https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228923053_Einstein%27s_PaperExplanation_of_the_Perihelion_Motion_of_Mercury_from_General_Relativity_Theory
>
> 2) Zur allgemeinen Relativitätstheorie (To the general theory of relativity).
> Presented Nov. 4; Published: Nov. 11, 1915.
> https://einsteinpapers.press.princeton.edu/vol6-doc/248
>
> Both papers were published at the Koniglich Preußische Akademie der
> Wissenschaften (Berlin). Sitzungsberichte.
>
> In the 2nd. paper from Nov. 4, Einstein still had the WRONG field equation
> (§ 3. Die Feldgleichungen der Gravitation.), under the form:
>
> Rᵤᵥ = 8πG/c⁴ Tᵤᵥ
>
> This wrong GFE was modified (and the theory adjusted) to match Hilbert's
> solution and, in a 2nd. presentation on Nov.25, 1915, it adopted the modern
> form:
>
> Rᵤᵥ - 1/2 R gᵤᵥ = 8πG/c⁴ Tᵤᵥ , Hilbert-Einstein field equation for GR.
>
> Almost since its publishing (Dec.4, 1915), physicists from different schools
> either accepted or rejected such idiotic theory. The left side is PURE
> non-euclidean geometry, born with Gauss, developed by Riemann with
> further elaboration with tensorial math by Ricci, Levi-Civita, etc.
> The right side of the final GFE deals with matter and energy in the "world"
> (or Universe, as the Milky Way was believed to be by then).
>
> The MYTH became to be spread as: “Space-time tells matter how to move;
> matter tells space-time how to curve”. John Wheeler, American physicist,
> largely responsible for reviving interest in GR in the US after World War II.
>
> But this assertion is very far away from the ORIGINAL TRUTH: Einstein
> hacked his own theory on the 1st. paper, in order to fudge HOW COME his
> theory could explain the Mercury problem.
>
> In his childish approximation (Nov.4), he used the incorrect 1914 Entwurf
> and made Tᵤᵥ = 0, which left his incorrect Rᵤᵥ = 0, also.
>
> Rᵤᵥ, the Ricci tensor, is a purely geometrical expression of non-euclidean
> space (three dimensions x, y, z) and has NOTHING TO DO WITH MATTER.
>
> So, how come Einstein explained Mercury's perihelion shift if he used a
> simplified version of Rᵤᵥ = 0? Very simple: without any shame, he inserted
> the Sun as a point-like mass at the origin of coordinates and used the
> Newtonian Potential G.M/r (disguising GM with α and adopting M=1, in
> natural notation).
>
> Let me repeat this: HE HACKED HIS OWN Rᵤᵥ = 0 complex formula, which
> is purely geometrical, by HAND-INSERTING the Sun's mass and its derived
> gravitational potential, making the FOUR components of spacetime being
> dependent on Newtonian gravity.
>
> And Schwarzschild (who knows why), bought this without questioning such
> heresy, while battling at the Russian front in the WWI. Probably he was bored
> and played the contest that Einstein did about exact analytical solutions.
>
> Now, prior to enter into the 1st. paper about Mercury, let me use some
> equations that I posted time ago at:
>
> Simple formulae in physics vs. GR formulae (which have physical meaning?)
> https://groups.google.com/g/sci.physics.relativity/c/mNOqv9Kgrjs
>
> ---------------------------------- Recap
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> Rᵤᵥ - 1/2 R gᵤᵥ = 8πG/c⁴ Tᵤᵥ , Hilbert-Einstein field equation for GR.
>
> 1) Einstein didn't used gᵤᵥ in his Nov.4, 1915 GFE.
>
> 2) Einstein didn't used R (Scalar curvature) in his Nov.4, 1915 GFE.
>
> 3) Rᵤᵥ = ∂ᵢ Γⁱᵤᵥ - ∂ᵤ Γⁱᵥᵢ + Γⁱᵢᵣ Γʳᵤᵥ - Γⁱᵤᵣ Γʳᵢᵥ , Ricci curvature tensor
>
> where
>
> Γᵛᵢᵤ = 1/2 gᵛˣ (∂ᵢ gᵤₓ + ∂ᵥ gᵢₓ - ∂ₓ gᵢᵤ) , Christoffel symbols
>
> The Ricci tensor is the only thing that remains on his Nov.4, 1915 paper.
>
> 4) Tᵤᵥ = (Tᵘᵛ) for u,v = 0,1,2,3 , Stress-energy tensor. Einstein did Tᵤᵥ = 0
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> FORENSIC ANALYSIS OF THE 1st. PAPER ON MERCURY PROBLEM
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Einstein simplified Rᵤᵥ = 0 with this equation that opens the Nov.4 paper:
>
> Σᵢ ∂Γⁱᵤᵥ/∂xᵢ + Σᵢᵣ Γⁱᵤᵣ Γʳᵥᵢ = 0 (1)
>
> with
>
> Γⁱᵤᵥ = -1/2 gᵛˣ (∂gᵤₓ/∂xᵢ + ∂gᵢₓ/∂xᵥ - ∂gᵢᵤ/∂xₓ) (2)
>
> and, due to his assertion: "Otherwise, we make the same fundamental
> hypothesis as in the last paper, that the scalar of the energy tensor of the
> ”material“ always vanishes, so that we have the determinant equation"
>
> |gᵤᵥ| = -1 (3)
>
> Einstein follows: "We place a point mass (the Sun) at the origin of the
> coordinate system. The gravitational field, which this mass point produces,
> can be calculated from these equations through successive
> approximations. In this regard, one may think that the gᵤᵥ for the given
> solar mass is not yet mathematically fully determined through (1) and (3).
> ....................
> "These overlying considerations allow me to obtain a solution without
> considering the question whether or not it is the only unique possibility.
> With the above in mind, we go forward. The gᵤᵥ is given next in the “zero-th
> approximation” in accord with the Relativity Theory scheme"
>
> NOTE: follows the -1, -1, -1, +1 matrix. (equation 4)
>
> "Or more compactly gᵤᵥ = - δᵤᵥ ; gᵤ₄ = g₄ᵤ ; g₄₄ = 1 (equations 4a)
>
> Hereby, u and v are the indices 1, 2, 3: the δᵤᵥ is the Kronecker delta symbol
> equal to 1 or 0, that is when either u = v or u ≠ v."
>
> "We now set forward the following, that the gᵤᵥ differ from the values given
> in (4a) by an amount that is small compared to unity. This deviation we
> handle as a small magnitude change of ”first order“, and functions of n-th
> degree of this deviation as of “n-th order“. Equations (1) and (3) are set
> in the condition of (4a), for calculation through successive approximations
> of the gravitational field up to the magnitude n-th order of accuracy. We
> speak in this sense of the ”n-th approximation“; the equations (4a) are the
> ”zero-th approximation“."
>
> "The following given solutions have the following coordinate system-tied properties:
>
> 1. All components are independent of x4.
> 2. The solution is (spatially) symmetric about the origin of the coordinate
> system, in the sense that one obtains the same solution if one makes a
> linear orthogonal (spatial) transformation.
> 3. The equations gᵤ₄ = g₄ᵤ = 0 are valid exactly (for u = 1, 2, 3).
> 4. The gᵤᵥ possess at infinity the values given in (4a)."
>
> First Approximation
>
> It is easy to verify, that first order accuracy of the equations (1) and (3) as
> well as the above named 4 conditions is satisfied through the substitution of
>
> gᵤᵥ = - δᵤᵥ + α . (∂²r/∂xᵤxᵥ - δᵤᵥ/r) = - δᵤᵥ - α . xᵤxᵥ/r³ ; g₄₄ = 1 - α/r (4b) "
>
> ----------------------------------------- STOP LITERAL QUOTING
> -----------------------------------
>
> Here is the HACK that puzzled Schwarzschild and that made him to tell
> about it to Einstein in a letter. Still, Schwarzschild followed the challenge.
>
> gᵤᵥ = - δᵤᵥ ; gᵤ₄ = g₄ᵤ ; g₄₄ = 1 (equations 4a). Pure geometrical meaning.
>
> gᵤᵥ = - δᵤᵥ - α . xᵤxᵥ/r³ ; g₄₄ = 1 - α/r (4b).
>
> Newtonial GRAVITATIONAL FIELD due to the Sun mass M, introduced BY
> HAND and at his convenience to carry on the plagiarism of Gerber's
> equation along the next 5 pages full of mathturbation (yet he fooled
> everyone who was not silenced).
>
> Then, with the same MAGIC that he said GR had, he arrived to:
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> "For an entire passage, the perihelion moves by
>
> 𝜖 = 3π . α/[a. (1- e²)] (equation 13)
>
> in the directional sense of the orbital motion, when we designate by a the
> major half axis, and by e the eccentricity.This leads one to the period T
> (in seconds), so one obtains with c as light velocity in cm/sec:
>
> 𝜖 = 24π³.a²/[c² . T². (1- e²)] (equation 14)
>
> This calculation leads to the planet Mercury to move its perihelion forward
> by 43′′ per century, while the astronomers give 45′′±5′′, an exceptional
> difference between observation and Newtonian theory. This has great
> significance as full agreement."
> ........
> END OF PAPER
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> The HACK, by hand-inserting out of thin air the equation (4b) payed off.
>
> He obtained his formula by reverse engineering of Gerber's formula (he died
> on August 1909, so he couldn't defend himself):
>
> c² =24π³.a²/[ψ . τ² . (1- ε²)]
>
> (Gerber original search, assuming as equals the speed of gravity and light).
>
> Values used by Gerber in 1898:
>
> a = a = 5.768 × 1010 m (semi-major axis)
> ε = e = 0.2056 (excentricity of Mercury’s orbit)
> τ = T = 88 days (7.603 × 10^6 sec) (period of Mercury’s orbit)
> ψ = 𝜖 = 4.789 × 10^-7 rad/orb (perihelion shift per 1 orbit, in rad/orbit)
>
> Gerber obtained c = 305500 km/sec and, 17 years later, Einstein obtained
> the value of ψ = 𝜖 .
>
> And all of this, by HACKING (4a) formulae with Newton's gravitational
> potential and, SPECIALLY, by modifying the TIME FOURTH DIMENSION
> with - α/r , using since that point:
>
> g₄₄ = 1 - α/r (time component of spacetime now depending on gravity)
>
> What a ROTTEN FISH!
>
> Any coincidence with Gerber's retarded gravitational potential, here:
>
> The Spatial and Temporal Propagation of Gravity
> by Paul Gerber
> in Stargard, Pomerania, 1898
>
> http://www.alternativephysics.org/gerber/Perihelion.htm
>
> ------------------------------------- Excerpt
> --------------------------------------------------
> Apart from its speed c, the potential also moves with the speed of the
> attracting mass, from which it emanates. The path r - Δr, which the two
> approaching movements, that of the potential and that of the attracted
> mass, travel in time Δt, amounts therefore to
>
> Δt . (c - Δr/Δt}
>
> while r = c Δt. So we obtain for the distance at which the potential begins
> to form, and to which it is inversely proportional
>
> r - Δr = r . (1 - 1/c . Δr/Δt}
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> It's NOT AN UNFORTUNATE COINCIDENCE. It's on purpose, and Einstein
> always will be a PLAGIARIST, a COPYCAT, a THIEF, a LIAR and a CON MAN,
> who is laughing in HELL from all of his believers and PARTNERS IN CRIME
> (No doubt he had many, to be published and "tested").
>
> Curiously, the fucker (like rats do) never addressed the Mercury's problem
> again. He knew he was dirty and that the paper couldn't resist an analysis.
>
> Now: Will JanPB, Dono or anyone else question this ABSOLUTE truth?
> With which face? A stone face? As I always say: fanatic retarded relativists.
>
> Bye.
>
>

I forgot to add that, in the same paper where Mercury's perihelion is analyzed, the fucker
also introduced his GRAVITATIONAL DEFLECTION OF LIGHT, using the same HACK!

I quote:

"As one sees from (4b), our theory brings with it that in the case of a
slowly moving mass the components g₁₁ to g₃₃ already appear to the non-zero
magnitude of first order. We will see later that hereby there is no difference
between Newton’s law (in the first order approximation). However, it gives
a somewhat different influence of the gravitational field on the light ray as in
my previous work; as the light velocity is introduced through the equation

Σ gᵤᵥ dxᵤ dxᵥ = 0

By use of the Huygens principle, one finds from (5) and (4b) through a simple
calculation, that a light ray from the Sun at distance Δ undergoes an angular
deflection of magnitude 2α/Δ, while the earlier calculation, by which the Hypothesis
Σ Tᵘᵤ = 0 was not involved, had given the value α/Δ.

A corresponding light ray from the surface rim of the Sun should give a deviation
of 1.7′′ (instead of 0.85′′). Herein there is no shift of the spectral lines through the
gravitational potential, for which Mr. Freundlich has measured the magnitude against
the fixed stars, and independently determined that this only depends on g₄₄."

END OF QUOTE

He also hacked this result, probably by data given by astronomers in the 9 solar eclipses
between 1912 and 1915 around the world.

What a fucker, fudging everything he couldn't plagiarize.

Richard Hertz wrote:

> A corresponding light ray from the surface rim of the Sun should give a
> deviation of 1.7′′ (instead of 0.85′′). Herein there is no shift of the
> spectral lines through the gravitational potential, for which Mr.
> Freundlich has measured the magnitude against the fixed stars, and
> independently determined that this only depends on g₄₄." END OF QUOTE
>
> He also hacked this result, probably by data given by astronomers in the
> 9 solar eclipses between 1912 and 1915 around the world.
> What a fucker, fudging everything he couldn't plagiarize.

kiss my ass.

On 9/20/2021 1:51 PM, Richard Hertz wrote:
> I forgot to add that, in the same paper where Mercury's perihelion is analyzed, the fucker
> also introduced his GRAVITATIONAL DEFLECTION OF LIGHT, using the same HACK!

That is so cool, how Einstein could, from existing data, figure out the
Mercury precession issue and how much gravity deflects light! And the
photoelectric effect! And... Imagine how so many great discoveries from
one man! No wonder you're so envious!! :-)

Dono, Bodkin et all.

Ad-hominem attacks won't change the problem that I posted: Since the very beginning,
general relativity is an impressive steaming pile of crap.

Einstein, the fucker thief, plagiarist and con man, MANIPULATED (hacked with pervertion)
his lame equations to forge results, but in desperation he made it in such a vulgar and cheap
way that even a high-school student could observe IF he question himself:

When did this thing about matter bending space started? And how was it demonstrated?

And if this student read (no need to be a master in tensorial math and analytical geometry)
that Einstein did a magic pass, fudging the development and results, he/she quickly will
understand that everything around GR is false, because his roots are false, rotten.

Einstein, cornered by the fact that Hilbert was going to make a presentation of his GFE by
mid November 1915, rushed to present at the PAS and in a frenetic (hysterical) succession
of events everything he could to "prove" two out of three problems that himself postulated
as a proof of GR several years ago (1912-1913).

And he FAILED because mathematics IS NOT physics. So, to help physics, the IDIOT made
absurd assumptions, contradicting himself within three paragraphs in the same page:
Equations (4a) and (4b).

And, as the cretin had no shame nor dignity, presented such HACK to "prove" Mercury's
perihelion shift and an improved factor for gravitational light deflection by the Sun.

But the theory that he used (Entwurf) was FLAWED to the core. Because SPACE doesn't
bend under gravity. It's an stupid proposition that he wanted to BE TRUE by meddling
geometry with matter-energy.

And because such Nov.4 1915 was SO PATHETIC, SO LAME, it was buried into the layers
of history because it doesn't resist the SLIGHTEST analysis.

After that shameful presentation, on Nov.25 he presented a plagiarism of Hilbert's GFE.
And due to the fact that Hilbert was a mathematician (top one), he didn't bothered in
pursuing Einstein by accusing him of plagiarism. After all, he didn't care what, for him,
was only a brief intellectual exercise.

But, regarding physics, in Nov.4 1915, IDIOCY took the place of REASON because it was
convenient for many people in power and in different countries in the years to come. If
such powerful elite didn't sent Eddington in 1919 while preparing the press for the fudged
result, nothing would have changed in the world. The devastation that WWI brought to
Europe was one of the reasons for such events taking place since 1919.

Now, 100 years later, and after 5 generations of MENTAL INBREEDING, people like you, Bodkin,
or Dono, JanPB, etc., are sold in body and soul to this GR shit (also SR).

None of you can handle the truth: you, believers in relativity, wasted your entire adult life by
living a lie about physics. You can't handle that such lost amount of time will never be given
back to you, and that is too late for your fossilized brains to be REPROGRAMMED.

So, you'll have to live with your shit until the end. Too late for changing horses.

But, of course, you'll rebel and will spite, rave, rant, scream, kick, insult, etc., to people
like me who used without alterations the original documents to support my claim.

If you want to show some intelligence, debate and refute my analysis by using
mathematics and RATIONAL THINKING.

Stop behaving like angry child. Be adults and behave accordingly in your answers.

Because if not, I have the right on this one and you don't. It's your choice
how to proceed.

And, by the way, this is only a hobby for me, a retired engineer.

On Monday, 20 September 2021 at 20:36:14 UTC+2, Michael Moroney wrote:
> On 9/20/2021 1:51 PM, Richard Hertz wrote:
> > I forgot to add that, in the same paper where Mercury's perihelion is analyzed, the fucker
> > also introduced his GRAVITATIONAL DEFLECTION OF LIGHT, using the same HACK!
> That is so cool, how Einstein could, from existing data, figure out the
> Mercury precession issue and how much gravity deflects light!

Stupid Mike, according to your idiot guru and his Shit the light
paths are straight lines, by definition.

Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dono, Bodkin et all.
>
> Ad-hominem attacks won't change the problem that I posted: Since the very beginning,
> general relativity is an impressive steaming pile of crap.

You are wasting your time. Verbosely.

Notice that the engagement you’re getting is less and less as you get more
strident. You are writing like a reporter for TMZ or Gente.

>
> Einstein, the fucker thief, plagiarist and con man, MANIPULATED (hacked with pervertion)
> his lame equations to forge results, but in desperation he made it in
> such a vulgar and cheap
> way that even a high-school student could observe IF he question himself:
>
> When did this thing about matter bending space started? And how was it demonstrated?
>
> And if this student read (no need to be a master in tensorial math and analytical geometry)
> that Einstein did a magic pass, fudging the development and results, he/she quickly will
> understand that everything around GR is false, because his roots are false, rotten.
>
> Einstein, cornered by the fact that Hilbert was going to make a presentation of his GFE by
> mid November 1915, rushed to present at the PAS and in a frenetic (hysterical) succession
> of events everything he could to "prove" two out of three problems that himself postulated
> as a proof of GR several years ago (1912-1913).
>
> And he FAILED because mathematics IS NOT physics. So, to help physics, the IDIOT made
> absurd assumptions, contradicting himself within three paragraphs in the same page:
> Equations (4a) and (4b).
>
> And, as the cretin had no shame nor dignity, presented such HACK to "prove" Mercury's
> perihelion shift and an improved factor for gravitational light deflection by the Sun.
>
> But the theory that he used (Entwurf) was FLAWED to the core. Because SPACE doesn't
> bend under gravity. It's an stupid proposition that he wanted to BE TRUE by meddling
> geometry with matter-energy.
>
> And because such Nov.4 1915 was SO PATHETIC, SO LAME, it was buried into the layers
> of history because it doesn't resist the SLIGHTEST analysis.
>
> After that shameful presentation, on Nov.25 he presented a plagiarism of Hilbert's GFE.
> And due to the fact that Hilbert was a mathematician (top one), he didn't bothered in
> pursuing Einstein by accusing him of plagiarism. After all, he didn't care what, for him,
> was only a brief intellectual exercise.
>
> But, regarding physics, in Nov.4 1915, IDIOCY took the place of REASON because it was
> convenient for many people in power and in different countries in the years to come. If
> such powerful elite didn't sent Eddington in 1919 while preparing the press for the fudged
> result, nothing would have changed in the world. The devastation that WWI brought to
> Europe was one of the reasons for such events taking place since 1919.
>
> Now, 100 years later, and after 5 generations of MENTAL INBREEDING,
> people like you, Bodkin,
> or Dono, JanPB, etc., are sold in body and
> soul to this GR shit (also SR).
>
> None of you can handle the truth: you, believers in relativity, wasted
> your entire adult life by
> living a lie about physics. You can't handle that such lost amount of
> time will never be given
> back to you, and that is too late for your fossilized brains to be REPROGRAMMED.
>
> So, you'll have to live with your shit until the end. Too late for changing horses.
>
> But, of course, you'll rebel and will spite, rave, rant, scream, kick,
> insult, etc., to people
> like me who used without alterations the original documents to support my claim.
>
> If you want to show some intelligence, debate and refute my analysis by using
> mathematics and RATIONAL THINKING.
>
> Stop behaving like angry child. Be adults and behave accordingly in your answers.
>
> Because if not, I have the right on this one and you don't. It's your choice
> how to proceed.
>
> And, by the way, this is only a hobby for me, a retired engineer.
>
>

--
Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

This is an English translation of the letter that Schwarzschild sent to Einstein, after
he got a copy of his Nov.4 paper. By then, he was at a war scenario, and yet was
capable to find an EXACT ANALYTICAL SOLUTION for these equations, BUT he was
distressed by Einstein's HACK, so he did his own one. I quote the first part (the letter
is in the link that I provided for the Mercury's paper):

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Letter from K Schwarzschild to A Einstein dated 22 December 1915
(The letter is presented in English owing to Professor Roger A. Rydin)

Honored Mr. Einstein,

In order to be able to verify your gravitational theory, I have brought myself nearer to your
work on the perihelion of Mercury, and occupied myself with the problem solved with the
First Approximation. Thereby, I found myself in a state of great confusion.

I found for the first approximation of the coefficient gᵤᵥ other than your solution the following two:

gᵤᵥ = - β . xᵤ.xᵥ/r⁵ + δᵤᵥ . (1/3.β/r³) ; g₄₄ = 1

As follows, it had beside your α yet a second term, and the problem was physically undetermined.

From this I made at once by good luck a search for a full solution. A not too difficult calculation
gave the following result:

It gave only a line element, which fulfills your conditions 1) to 4), as well as field- and determinant
equations, and at the null point and only in the null point is singular.

If:

x₁ = r cos φ cos θ, x₂ = r sin φ cos θ, x₃ = r sin θ
R = (r³ + α³)^1/3

then the line element becomes:

ds² = (1 - γ/R) dt² − dR²/(1 - γ/R) - R² . (dθ² + sin²θ . dφ²)

R, θ, φ are not “allowed” coordinates, with which one must build the field equations, because they do
not have the determinant = 1, however the line element expresses itself as the best.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So, there you have it: Schwarzschild (a true genius, 43 y.o., professor in Göttingen, pal of Klein, Hilbert
and Minkowski) UNMASKED Einstein's farce (very politely, as was used) and told him that he solved
the problem by using 1914 Entwurf and VIOLATING a primordial rule of the metric because |gᵤᵥ| ≠ -1
with his solution.
Now compare:

Einstein: gᵤᵥ = - δᵤᵥ - α . xᵤxᵥ/r³ ; g₄₄ = 1 - α/r (Equation 4b or THE HACK)
Schwarzschild: gᵤᵥ = - β . xᵤ.xᵥ/r⁵ + δᵤᵥ . (1/3.β/r³) ; g₄₄ = 1 (THE NEW HACK)

Einstein: x₁ x₂ x₃ x₄ and |gᵤᵥ| = -1
Schwarzschild: x₁ = r cos φ cos θ, x₂ = r sin φ cos θ, x₃ = r sin θ AND |gᵤᵥ| ≠ -1

He was telling Einstein, in mathematical language: Your are an IDIOT and I KNOW what you did.

Then, Schwarzschild kept the farce going by showing the retarded how to handle math.

It was a lost for us all that Schwarzschild was fatally ill, dying in May 1916.

Had he lived longer, we would have a TRUE cosmological theory. He was a genius, physicist and
astronomer, and the first who introduced the concept of cosmology in astronomy with his seminal
paper about the curvature of the Universe in 1900, when Einstein was without a job and rejected for
a teaching position.

https://mathshistory.st-andrews.ac.uk/Biographies/Schwarzschild/

On Monday, September 20, 2021 at 4:36:33 PM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:

<snip>

> You are wasting your time. Verbosely.
>
> Notice that the engagement you’re getting is less and less as you get more
> strident. You are writing like a reporter for TMZ or Gente.

<snip>

To the point, Bodkin, to the point. Your lame post only is a sample of your inability
to show where the analysis is wrong. Everything else is the job of a shill, that you
embody perfectly.

Show your critic on the math, if you can. And if you can't, I couldn't care less. I just
tell myself: Of course he can't. He invested too much time supporting the myth of SR/GR.

Nor you neither anybody else here can refute my OP, showing respect and intelligence.

On Monday, September 20, 2021 at 11:36:14 AM UTC-7, Michael Moroney wrote:
> On 9/20/2021 1:51 PM, Richard Hertz wrote:
> > I forgot to add that, in the same paper where Mercury's perihelion is analyzed, the fucker
> > also introduced his GRAVITATIONAL DEFLECTION OF LIGHT, using the same HACK!
> That is so cool, how Einstein could, from existing data, figure out the
> Mercury precession issue and how much gravity deflects light! And the
> photoelectric effect! And... Imagine how so many great discoveries from
> one man! No wonder you're so envious!! :-)

Well , Einstein will forever be famous, more famous than Newton and Maxwell combined, to the chagrin of the kapo Richard Hertz who will be remembered for the imbecilities he posted from his lunatic asylum in Argentina.

Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Monday, September 20, 2021 at 4:36:33 PM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> You are wasting your time. Verbosely.
>>
>> Notice that the engagement you’re getting is less and less as you get more
>> strident. You are writing like a reporter for TMZ or Gente.
>
> <snip>
>
> To the point, Bodkin, to the point. Your lame post only is a sample of your inability
> to show where the analysis is wrong.

Let me just remind you that the more shrill you get and the more you use
deliberately abusive language in your “analysis”, the less likely you are
to get an interested response. You are not owed a rebuttal just because you
dare people to come forward with one. The sillier you get with your posts,
the more you are going to get ignored. Being ignored is not a victory for
you. If you think it is, then just go whole-hog, batshit crazy with your
next post and you’ll have an eerily quiet victory.

> Everything else is the job of a shill, that you
> embody perfectly.
>
> Show your critic on the math, if you can. And if you can't, I couldn't care less. I just
> tell myself: Of course he can't. He invested too much time supporting the myth of SR/GR.
>
> Nor you neither anybody else here can refute my OP, showing respect and intelligence.
>
>

--
Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

On Monday, September 20, 2021 at 5:42:47 PM UTC-3, Dono. wrote:

> Well , Einstein will forever be famous, more famous than Newton and Maxwell combined, to the chagrin of the kapo Richard Hertz who will be remembered for the imbecilities he posted from his lunatic asylum in Argentina.

Well, fame is a bitch.

Google most famous names (2021):

1) Trump: About 547,000,000 results (0.82 seconds)
2) Gravity: About 526,000,000 results (0.68 seconds) 
3) Biden: About 458,000,000 results (0.75 seconds)
4) Newton: About 373,000,000 results (0.65 seconds)
5) Lionel Messi: About 364,000,000 results (0.76 second
6) Kardashian: About 208,000,000 results (0.87 seconds)
7) Maxwell: About 244,000,000 results (0.78 seconds)
8) Putin: About 175,000,000 results (0.82 seconds)
9) Electromagnetism: About 168,000,000 results (0.72 seconds) 
10) Einstein: About 132,000,000 results (0.86 seconds)
11) Michael Jackson: About 99,900,000 results (1.02 seconds)
12) Relativity: About 76,200,000 results (0.91 seconds)

Not even Einstein + Relativity can top either Maxwell, Newton or Gravity alone (not to mention if combined).

On Monday, September 20, 2021 at 1:14:39 PM UTC-7, Richard Hertz spewed:
> a whole bunch of imbecilities<

Dumbestfuck nazi bootlicker

Schwarzschild found a symbolic solution to a PARTICULAR form of the EINSTEIN FIELD EQUATIONS (EFE).
Einstein produced an approximate solution to the GENERAL form of the EFE's.
"\alpha", far from being undetermined turns out to be nothing but 2GM/c^2, something that we all know today by the name of......"the Schwarzschild radius".
So, \alpha/r is truly negligible n the case of the solar system meaning that....
....... Einstein solution REDUCES to Schwarzschild's
Thus, you ate a huge amount of shit. Again.

On Monday, September 20, 2021 at 6:14:35 PM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:

<snip>

> Let me just remind you that the more shrill you get and the more you use
> deliberately abusive language in your “analysis”, the less likely you are
> to get an interested response. You are not owed a rebuttal just because you
> dare people to come forward with one. The sillier you get with your posts,
> the more you are going to get ignored. Being ignored is not a victory for
> you. If you think it is, then just go whole-hog, batshit crazy with your
> next post and you’ll have an eerily quiet victory.

<snip>

You are right only in one thing: I abuse in the use of foul language. Regarding the rest of your comments,
I think that you are posing once again as a psychologist and an intellectual, and fail in both impersonations.

Also, many people here said many repeatedly that GR is not addressed here because it's too difficult so the
majority of the posts are about SR.

Obviously when someone, as in many OP of mine, present something that's a threat to other person credence,
belief or experience, it's immediately deprecated with comments like: "you don't understand", "you aren't up to
the challenge", "how dare you to touch this subject, ignorant", etc.

Well, there are no instruments to measure the smartness or intelligence of the members of this forum, except
by using their OP or replies under rules of logic and articulated explanations. If you can't explain yourself, then......

So, besides my abuse of abusive language, the challenges are still present and have a logical and a mathematical
coherence plus explanations without using fallacies. This is me, and my methods.

If no one is interested in what I post, I don't care. I don't post to gain popularity here. I post either because I'm bothered
by the stupidity in this world OR because I found the topic as profound or innovative.

This OP is the 2nd. type: Innovative, because I didn't read anywhere such analysis of the historic paper
from Einstein about Mercury. So I studied the subject, gathered documents and made the OP.

Is up to anyone to dispute what I wrote or stop reading at the first paragraph.

But I've the feeling that one or two chickened out to discuss the OP here.

On Monday, September 20, 2021 at 3:51:50 PM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote:
> But I've the feeling that one or two chickened out to discuss the OP here.

Look up, imbecile

On 9/20/2021 6:51 PM, Richard Hertz wrote:
> On Monday, September 20, 2021 at 6:14:35 PM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> Let me just remind you that the more shrill you get and the more you use
>> deliberately abusive language in your “analysis”, the less likely you are
>> to get an interested response. You are not owed a rebuttal just because you
>> dare people to come forward with one. The sillier you get with your posts,
>> the more you are going to get ignored. Being ignored is not a victory for
>> you. If you think it is, then just go whole-hog, batshit crazy with your
>> next post and you’ll have an eerily quiet victory.
>
> <snip>
>
> You are right only in one thing: I abuse in the use of foul language. Regarding the rest of your comments,
> I think that you are posing once again as a psychologist and an intellectual, and fail in both impersonations.

Just as you failed at posing as some "professor" grading Einstein's SR
paper.

> Obviously when someone, as in many OP of mine, present something that's a threat to other person credence,
> belief or experience, it's immediately deprecated with comments like: "you don't understand", "you aren't up to
> the challenge", "how dare you to touch this subject, ignorant", etc.

It's quite obvious that most of the time you DON'T understand the
problem you're trying to discuss.
>
> Well, there are no instruments to measure the smartness or intelligence of the members of this forum, except
> by using their OP or replies under rules of logic and articulated explanations. If you can't explain yourself, then......

It's clear to me where you must lie on any smartness scale...

> This OP is the 2nd. type: Innovative, because I didn't read anywhere such analysis of the historic paper
> from Einstein about Mercury. So I studied the subject, gathered documents and made the OP.

And you go off into the weeds. That's why you get those deprecating
comments you whined about.

On Monday, September 20, 2021 at 7:50:20 PM UTC-3, Dono. wrote:

> Schwarzschild found a symbolic solution to a PARTICULAR form of the EINSTEIN FIELD EQUATIONS (EFE).

Wrong, idiot. Schwarzschild worked in a FAILED GFE, based on 1914 Entwurf. He didn't have access to the final
(Hilbert) solution, plagiarized and presented 3 weeks after Nov.4 (that was what Schwarzschild read and answered).
It took Hilbert to correct the exact solution with his GFE, what he did in 1917. And, as a person having honor, he named
his solution after Schwarzschild. And it's Hilbert-Schwarzschild metric which is taught and used ever since.

> Einstein produced an approximate solution to the GENERAL form of the EFE's.
> "\alpha", far from being undetermined turns out to be nothing but 2GM/c^2, something that we all know today by the name of......"the Schwarzschild radius".

Einstein hacked his Nov.4 paper inserting MANUALLY Newton's gravitational potential and a point-like particle with mass: the Sun.
Then, with a 1-Body problem (used a test-particle with zero mass, like Schwarzschild) he approached the topic of Mercury orbits.

> So, \alpha/r is truly negligible n the case of the solar system meaning that....Einstein solution REDUCES to Schwarzschild's.

An idiot fanatic present again: Einstein never had a solution. Only lame approximations of first and second order. Comparing
him with Schwarzschild is a disrespect for such genius, while Einstein was a moron working with a TEAM!

> Thus, you ate a huge amount of shit. Again.

Dono, you are not going to convince me to adopt your diet!

On Monday, September 20, 2021 at 5:14:39 PM UTC-3, Richard Hertz wrote:

I repeat:

> So, there you have it: Schwarzschild (a true genius, 43 y.o., professor in Göttingen, pal of Klein, Hilbert
> and Minkowski) UNMASKED Einstein's farce (very politely, as was used) and told him that he solved
> the problem by using 1914 Entwurf and VIOLATING a primordial rule of the metric because |gᵤᵥ| ≠ -1
> with his solution.

> Now compare:
>
> Einstein: gᵤᵥ = - δᵤᵥ - α . xᵤxᵥ/r³ ; g₄₄ = 1 - α/r (Equation 4b or THE HACK)
> Schwarzschild: gᵤᵥ = - β . xᵤ.xᵥ/r⁵ + δᵤᵥ . (1/3.β/r³) ; g₄₄ = 1 (THE NEW HACK)
>
> Einstein: x₁ x₂ x₃ x₄ and |gᵤᵥ| = -1
> Schwarzschild: x₁ = r cos φ cos θ, x₂ = r sin φ cos θ, x₃ = r sin θ AND |gᵤᵥ| ≠ -1
>
> He was telling Einstein, in mathematical language: Your are an IDIOT and I KNOW what you did.

At any case, Schwarzschild followed the game defined by Einstein's Nov.4 paper, and completely reformulated
the development of Mercury's perihelion shift with a metric that proved be the only analytical solution for 40 years,
until Kerr's metric in 1963.

Einstein NEVER acknowledged Schwarzschild in the following years, and took care that his papers (were two of them)
were deeply buried into history. The man and his partners had the power to do that, and they did.

It took decades until Schwarzschild, through Hilbert's 1917 solution be re-discovered. Almost 4 decades, and in the US.

Then, the black hole thing started to grow up. Now, it has taken cosmology entirely.

On Monday, September 20, 2021 at 4:37:31 PM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote:
> On Monday, September 20, 2021 at 7:50:20 PM UTC-3, Dono. wrote:
>
>
> > Schwarzschild found a symbolic solution to a PARTICULAR form of the EINSTEIN FIELD EQUATIONS (EFE).
> Schwarzschild worked in a FAILED GFE, based on 1914 Entwurf.
No, he didn't , dumbestfuck. His is the solution as we know it TODAY. Keep eating shit, odious kapo.

On Monday, September 20, 2021 at 4:52:57 PM UTC-7, Richard Hertz lied:

> Einstein NEVER acknowledged Schwarzschild in the following years, and took care that his papers (were two of them)
> were deeply buried into history.

Odious liar,

Einstein PRESENTED the Schwarzschild solution to the Academy. Your dementia is so advanced and your lying is so profound that you are contradicting......yourself!

Maciej Wozniak wrote:

> On Monday, 20 September 2021 at 20:36:14 UTC+2, Michael Moroney wrote:
>> On 9/20/2021 1:51 PM, Richard Hertz wrote:
>> > I forgot to add that, in the same paper where Mercury's perihelion is
>> > analyzed, the fucker also introduced his GRAVITATIONAL DEFLECTION OF
>> > LIGHT, using the same HACK!
>> That is so cool, how Einstein could, from existing data, figure out the
>> Mercury precession issue and how much gravity deflects light!
>
> Stupid Mike, according to your idiot guru and his Shit the light paths
> are straight lines, by definition.

Lech Wałęsa Agent Bolek. Kim jest Komu służy.

Richard Hertz wrote:

> 11) Michael Jackson: About 99,900,000 results (1.02 seconds)
> 12) Relativity: About 76,200,000 results (0.91 seconds)
>
> Not even Einstein + Relativity can top either Maxwell, Newton or
> Gravity alone (not to mention if combined).

you sure? Because nobody undrestand relativity this well. Quantum specs,
not even there. Kiss my ass.

Why Einstein was an inept physicist and resorted to plagiarize and fudge?

Some excerpts from different sources:

1) The first attempt to develop a relativistic theory of gravitation was made by Henri Poincaré. His approach,
which makes use of group-theoretical arguments, appears particularly original even today. A summary of
Poincaré's theory was read to the Academy of Sciences in Paris on 5 June 1905 before Einstein submitted
his 1905 paper on STR and the whole theory was completed in July 1905, before the publication of Einstein's
paper in September ; Poincaré's paper, however, was published only in 1906.

The historical importance of Poincaré's theory lies in the fact that between 1905 and 1911 no major relativistic
gravitational force law was developed which was not already contained in the formulas given by Poincaré.

In 1908, Hermann Minkowski too dealt with the question of a relativistic gravitational force law. Instead of deriving
the latter from general considerations as Poincaré did, Minkowski simply proceeded by analogy with the relativistic
electromagnetic force between two electrons replacing the product of the charges by the negative product of the
masses. Minkowski's force law was a particular case of Poincaré's force law, as Sommerfeld showed in 1910.

Since, according to Einstein's various accounts, it was in 1908 that Einstein became convinced that gravitation
could not be integrated within STR. (Minkowski influence?).

2) The physicists Josiah Willard Gibbs and Woldemar Voigt introduced the tensor concept as an extension of the
vector calculus, which was itself an outgrowth of Hamilton's quaternion calculus. These tensors were initially defined
with respect to the rotation group in 3-space and were later generalized to tensors with respect to the rotation group
in 4-space. (This was used by Minkowski for his space-time theory).

3) Another attempt, the following year, met with success, and Einstein began to lecture in the fall of 1908. Since
Einstein's lectures were not brilliant at that time, the prospect of a professorship was rather limited. The situation,
however, was to change in 1909. In that year, Einstein became an associate professor in theoretical physics at the
university of Zürich in October. Einstein taught three semesters at the university of Zürich and then, around Easter
1911, moved to the university of Prague, where he became a full professor in theoretical physics.

In Prague, the mathematician Georg Pick, one of Einstein's colleagues there, had suggested to Einstein the use of
the differential calculus of Ricci and Levi-Civita to solve his mathematical difficulties in generalizing STR (by the use
of tensor theory invented by Gibbs and Voigt).

Among the difficulties which hindered his progress toward that goal in July 1912, Einstein mentioned the foreseeable
LOSS of the immediate PHYSICAL MEANING of the space-time coordinates and the fact that he did not yet know the
form of the general space-time transformations. Einstein had already encountered a LOSS of PHYSICAL MEANING
with respect to the time coordinate, but now the space coordinates were affected as well. In view of these difficulties,
Einstein PUBLICLY ASKED HIS COLLEAGUES FOR HELP:

"I would like to ask all colleagues to try their hands at this important problem."
*********
NOTE: Einstein was willing to sell his soul to the devil in order to achieve something. THEN, he renounced to pursue
theories WITH PHYSICAL MEANING, and left him go through the abstract mathematical world of Riemann, Levi-Cicita,
Ricci and other MATHEMATICIANS (Levi-Civita ended being one of his advisers by 1915), and tried to match:

FUNCTION ([4 dimensional non-linear tensor based geometry]) = FUNCTION ([4-dimensional mass-energy distribution])
*********

4) At the end of the summer of 1912 Einstein moved back from Prague to Zurich, as professor Ordinarius at the Zurich ETH.

His friend Marcel Grossmann, who was now professor of mathematics at the ETH, responded to Einstein's request
for help on that subject. In 1913, Einstein and Grossmann presented the first sketch of a general theory of relativity.
A generally covariant equation of motion was obtained, but not generally covariant field equations.

5) In December 1911, Max Abraham initiated a new approach to gravitation by making use of the idea of a variable velocity
of light. The historical signifficance of Abraham's theory was that it prompted Einstein to develop his static theory of
gravitation two months later.

Whereas Abraham's and Einstein's theories gave up the constancy of the velocity of light, Nordström's and Mie's theories
assumed the validity of that postulate and of the relativity principle. The historical importance of Nordström's second theory
was that Einstein considered it to be the main rival theory to the Einstein-Grossmann theory.

6) In 1913, the efforts by Einstein and Grossmann to develop a general theory of relativity were to result in a paper entitled
"Entwurf einer verallgemeinerten Relativittstheorie und einer Theorie der Gravitation" [Sketch of a generalized relativity
theory and a theory of gravitation], which we shall refer to as the 1913 Entwurf paper. The paper contained two parts: a
PHYSICAL part written by Einstein and a MATHEMATICAL part written by Grossmann.
*************
NOTE: First approach to try to FIT BY FORCE space, time, mass and energy in:

FUNCTION ([4 dimensional non-linear tensor based geometry]) = FUNCTION ([4-dimensional mass-energy distribution])
************
KEY FACTOR: The equation of motion of a free particle in a static gravitational field can be expressed as

δ ∫ ds = 0 or δ ∫ √(c² dt² - dx² - dy² - dz²) = 0

CHALLENGE: To proof that such equation also represent of motion of a particle in a dynamical gravitational field. They
were not aware of the full use of tensor theory, to get a quadratic differential form ds² = gᵤᵥ dxᵘ dxᵛ .

At that time, Vladimir Vari¢ak had already presented a non-Euclidean, Lobachevskian interpretation of the special theory
of relativity, from which Grossman and Einstein profited. Thereby, the static theory and STR were reduced to particular
cases with gᵤᵥ in a 4x4 tensorial form with all values 0 except the diagonal: -1, -1, -1, c².

It was needed to express the REPRESENTATION of the form gᵤᵥ AS A GRAVITATIONAL FIELD in terms of a given
energy-momentum tensor Tᵘᵛ of matter.
************

7) In the 1913 Entwurf paper it was not analyzed solution of the field equations, but show that the theory worked with
the electromagnetic equations in a generally covariant form, which Friedrich Kottler HAD ALREADY DONE before.

Despite Einstein's initial desire to develop a generally covariant theory, Einstein and Grossmann had been unable to
derive generally covariant field equations.

The 1914 Entwurf Einstein-Grossmann (the collaboration was interrupted by WWI and Einstein being at Berlin) introduced
new tensorial notation, c = 1, an acceleration field interpreted as a "real" gravitational field (its transformations being
covariant along with field equations) , conditions restricting the choice of the reference system, a Hamiltonian formulation
of the gravitational field equations and the covariance of the action integral.

Einstein's Entwurf theory was, on the whole, rather negatively received by his colleagues, in particular by Gustav Mie, Max
Planck, and Max Abraham. Einstein's difficult task was to present a theory which some people might have considered as
even more incomprehensible, and which was based on the epistemological idea of a general relativity.

So far Einstein and Grossmann had shown that the field equations could be derived from a certain Lagrangian and that the
latter was covariant with respect to legitimate transformations. Consequently, the field equations possessed the same covariance.
But the extended covariance was largely illusory since, in 1915, Einstein rejected the field equations in part because the
gravitational field in a uniformly rotating system did not satisfy the field equations.

Thus, after two years of hard efforts, Einstein was to abandon the theory altogether when he found unsatisfactory consequences
of the field equations, realizing that the 1915 derivation of the Lagrangian had been defective. (By mid 1915, back to square one.)

NOTE: Then, in that 1915 summer, Einstein sought Hilbert's help.

8) When the new theory was completed in December 1914, Abraham in particular noted that Einstein saw in the implementation
of the relativity of inertia a decisive advantage of his tensor theory over scalar theories.

Abraham argued, however, that the relativity of inertia was not quantitatively secured in the 1914 Entwurf theory unless one
postulated the existence of enormous invisible masses. To Abraham, the introduction of such hypothetical masses was as
objectionable as the introduction of a hypothetical ether. Hence, Abraham argued that THERE WAS NO REASON TO OPT FOR
A TENSOR THEORY and added wittily that SCALAR THEORIES ought to be preferred in the name of Mach's "economy of thought."

In November 1915, Einstein finally was to achieve a generally covariant theory, after three years of hard work. The resulting field
equations are the standard field equations in use today. (after being guest of Hilbert in that summer, and convincing him to
help to develop a fully compliant GFE.