While a charge of plagiarism would seem overwhelming, what is remarkable is that Einsteins deficiencies as a scientist might be equally appalling. In an article called, Einsteins Mistake is Revived, 1999, in Physical Review, Focus, we are told that, Astronomers now say that the Universe is not only expanding, but the expansion is accelerating with time. According to Glanz Cosmology: Astronomers see a Cosmic Antigravity Force at Work, Science, 2-27-98: But as team member Alexei Filippenko of the University of California, Berkeley, announced at a meeting near Los Angeles last week, the dimness of the supernovae--pointing to unexpectedly great distances--implies that cosmic expansion has actually sped up in the billions of years since the stars exploded. Obviously, this is the opposite of what a gravity-driven universe should exhibit which means that the force of expansion continues to be increasing, in effect, nullifying the effect of gravity. What is remarkable is that Einstein came up with the idea of the Cosmologic Constant at a time when the universe was believed static and he couldnt explain why the universe just didnt collapse, so he invoked an antigravitational ad hoc force to allow for a static universe. His problem was solved, however, when astronomers discovered that the universe was expanding i.e. there was no longer the need to describe a static universe. Thus appealing to a model where the Big Bang could be viewed as a giant explosion in which the pieces were gradually slowing down solved the attraction or collapse models of the universe. Einstein couldnt drop ...the Cosmologic Constant, a term first invoked by Einstein in 1917... fast enough: He later recanted, (...my greatest blunder....) Revved-up Universe, Science News. What is amazing is that the Cosmologic Constant is being resurrected as evidence of antigravity running the universe. So Einstein went on the record to swear he was wrong when he might be right. This has to be an example of the about the worst judgement in the history of science.
Wouldnt you expect that the Person of the Century, Albert Einstein, be flawless in thought, conception and execution? He apparently plagiarized most of the special theory of relativity and he couldnt quite get a handle on the Cosmologic Constant, his greatest discovery that he recanted on when he was right. This would be a nightmare and a disaster for almost any other scientist, yet when it happens to Einstein, everyone looks the other way. His nickname should be wrongway Einstein. Perhaps when Einsteins father gave him a compass, he gave it to him with the north and south reversed so Einstein could find his way home.
What is the cosmologic constant? Is there a truly repulsive force in the universe, an antigravity? Consider this: Life is an ordering process. Throughout the universe we see evidence of entropy, the chaotic degradation of physical systems. Then we appear to have this ordering process going on all around us i.e. life. On earth, we see a progressive ordering process in life from the single-celled organisms of billions of years ago to the complexity of humanity. And all the while consider the Big Bang---the most ordering process in the history of the universe. It almost makes you believe in some overriding intelligence.
Who had access to Time Magazine when they researched Einstein? Were they aware of all the negative information or just the feel good stuff? It appears that no one in the upper echelons of the physics community felt it necessary or desirable to provide the truth about Einsteins true nature to Time Magazine. It is clear that Einstein has displaced thousands of reputable scientists. Consider the magnitude of the error with respect to the cosmologic constant: It is on a par with Watson and Crick discovering the structure of DNA, and, then because of someone else disputing their claim, going on the record to proclaim DNA to be, the worst mistake of their career which is exactly what Einstein did. Now imagine what would have happened 10 years later if Linus Pauling had picked up the torch and rediscovered and proved the double helix was correct. What would we say about Watson and Crick? That they had famously abandoned the double helix? Or that they had made the worst mistake of their career?
Is antigravity proven? The verdict is not yet in, but the data suggests it. Specifically, if there is no countervailing proof that the data could be due to other causes (bear in mind that every data set has multiple explanations); what makes one theory superior to another is not whether it is consistent with one data set but with all critical data sets. In other words a theory that is 99% consistent with the data may not be superior to another that only fits 75% of the data if the one with 99% consistency doesnt jibe with the absolutely critical remaining 1%. For now the data looks interesting.