Re: "not even trying: the corruption of real science"

Paul B. Andersen <relativity@paulba.no> wrote:

Den 11.12.2024 02:25, skrev LaurenceClarkCrossen:

"In his memoirs Count Harry Kessler records some conversations with
Einstein, including one where he asked the point-blank question : do
your theories relate to the atomic components? And receive the equally
blunt answer 'no'. Einstein gave his opinion that objects on such a
small scale would not be covered by his theory (See 'Diaries of a
Cosmopolitan' by Kessler, entry for Monday 14th Feb 1921)" [Newton, Zak.
WAS EINSTEIN WRONG? . The Electronic Book Company. Kindle Edition.]

 
Yes, Einstein was wrong when he thought that SR wouldn't
be applicable for "atomic components" such as electrons.
 
QED is based on SR.

Supposing that Einstem had such an opinion.  (probably not)

"No" was also the best possible answer
to get rid of the nuisance in the shortest possible time.
Note also that it is not clear at all what "atomic components"
might have meant at the time. (1921!)
For better understanding of the issues you would need a transcript
of !both sides! of the conversation.

Einstein worked with this Count Kesser on subjects like pacifism.
There is no indication that Kessler had much command of physics
beyond the obsolete high school level of his youth,

Jan