Sometimes a very important point can go unnoticed for years if no-one knows that it is there. But, after someone identifies and communicates that specific important point, it becomes easy to identify for everyone who now knows what to look for. This point is illustrated in The Unusual Paragraph puzzle.

One important reason why this has gone unnoticed is that finding finding the problem was hard, especially in the face of significant evidence that suggest Einstein’s equations are correct. Again, once you know what to look for, pointing out the mathematical problems becomes easier.

Another reason this problem is so difficult to find is because of the confusion between functions and equations. This one is so subtle that I doubt it could have been found before the advent of function oriented programming languages with nested scope definitions (e.g., C, C++, Ada, etc…). While this perspective on variable scope, functions, and equations is commonly found in body of knowledge of a modern day Computer Scientist, it was not part of the general body of knowledge in 1905, or in the years following, when Einstein’s work received the most scrutiny.

Lastly, some have suggested that Einstein’s findings are correct because his paper was published in a peer-reviewed journal over 100 years ago. My belief is that peer-review is not to “prove” that something is right, but is to confirm that 1) there isn’t anything obviously wrong, 2) that it is relevant, and 3) that it would be interesting for the journal’s readership. In 1905, the journal reviewers and editors felt Einstein’s paper met this criteria. I’m happy that the reviewers and editors of Galilean Electrodynamics feel that my papers have met their similar criteria.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.