Essay review

References

• Langevin , P. 1905 . La physique des electrons . Revue Generale des Sciences Pures et Appliques , 16 : 257 – 276 . S. Goldberg, ‘Abraham's theory of the electron’, Archive History of Exact Sciences, 7 (1970), 7–25; E. T. Whittaker, History of Theories of Aether and Electricity, 2 vols (Edinburgh, 1953), II, 27–77; O. J. Lodge, Electrons (London, 1906); R. McCormmach, ‘H. A. Lorentz and the electromagnetic view of nature’, Isis, 61 (1970), 459–97; A. I. Miller, ‘A study of Henri Poincaré's “Sur la Dynamique de l'Electron”’, Archive History of Exact Sciences, 10 (1973), 207–328; A. Einstein, H. A. Lorentz, H. Minkowski, et al., The Principle of Relativity (New York, 1952), reprint of 1923 Methuen (London) English language collection of papers by Einstein, Lorentz, Minkowski and Weyl; J. Larmor, Aether and Matter (Cambridge, 1900).
   Google Scholar
• Zahar , E. 1973 . Why did Einstein's programme supersede Lorentz's? . British Journal for the Philosophy of Science , 24 : 95 – 123 . this paper acknowledges the prior existence of Lorentz's scheme. S. J. Prokhovnik, ‘Did Einstein's programme supersede Lorentz's? British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 24 (1973), 336–40.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miller , S. 1905 . La physique des electrons . Revue Generale des Sciences Pures et Appliquees , 16 : 257 – 276 . A. I. Miller, ‘On Einstein, light quanta, radiation and relativity in 1905’, American Journal of Physics, d44 (1976), 912–23; G. H. Keswani, ‘Origin and Concept of Relativity’ British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 15 (1964), 286–306; 16 (1965), 19–32, 273–94; M. F. Podlaha, ‘Some new aspects of relativity: Remarks on Keswani's Paper’, British Journal for the Philosophy of Science’, 26 (1975), 133–37.
   Google Scholar
• Hirosige , T. 1968 . Theory of relativity and the ether . Japanese Studies in the History of Science , 7 : 37 – 53 .
   Google Scholar
• Jeans , J.H. 1930 . Mysterious Universe Cambridge New Background to Science (Cambridge, 1933), A. S. Eddington, Space, Time and Gravitation (Cambridge, 1968), pp. 200–201 (reprint of 1920 first edition); Nature of the Physical World (Cambridge, 1928). J. C. Graves, The Conceptual Foundations of Contemporary Relativity Theory (London, 1971). The closing chapter expresses a philosophy very similar to that of Jeans and Eddington. L. S. Stebbing, Philosophy and the Physicists (New York, 1958).
   Google Scholar
• Stern , J.P. 1978 . Hitler, the Führer and the People 56 – 77 . London describes Hitler's concept of the will. According to A. D. Beyerchen, Scientists under Hitler (Yale, New Haven, 1976), Lenard and Stark stressed that discovery could come only through observation and experiment, hence their rejection of Einstein's attitude as it developed after the mid-1920s, but they claimed that observation and the interpretation of experiment were recially determined and presumably subject to Nazi will.
   Google Scholar
• Badash , L. , Freedman , M.I. , Trenn , T.J. and Cruikshank , A.D. 1979 . Frederick Soddy 1877–1956 . British Journal for the History of Science , 12 : 245 – 288 . four commemorative papers.
   Google Scholar
• Apollonio , U. 1973 . Futurist Manifestos London
   Google Scholar
• The most thorough adverse criticism of Einsteinian physics and the Einstein myth that has been published recently appears to be Turner D. Hazelett R. The Einstein Myth and the Ives Papers Old Greenwich, Connecticut 1979 This contains a very well referenced account of the development of Relativity, and argues the case for acknowledging the priority of Poincare and Lorentz. It suggests that Einstein's theory is defective, and proposes the practically formally identical ether theory of H. E. Ives. Though of great value to the physicist and the historian by virtue of its comprehensive review of much material, some extracted from the correspondence between Larmor and Ives, the book is unduly polemical; sometimes uses vulgar language; attempts to link ether theory with a particular theological view and is very hostile to Einstein. Though these flaws spoil only a small part of an otherwise impressive work, they rob it of much of its power.
   Google Scholar
• Graves . 1930 . Mysterious Universe Cambridge
   Google Scholar
• Dingle , H. 1972 . Science at the Crossroads London
   Google Scholar
• Mumford , L. 1971 . Pentagon of Power London
   Google Scholar