<story><title>Einstein was no lone genius</title><url>http://www.nature.com/news/history-einstein-was-no-lone-genius-1.18793</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>sriku</author><text>What Einstein and others contributed towards GR in a decade is now generally taught in one semester of grad school physics. Ruling out the possibility that grad students are today &amp;gt;20x intelligent than Einstein, and considering that Einstein needed no more experimental results than already available to everyone in 1905, the emphasis ought not to be as simplistic as &amp;quot;lone genius&amp;quot;, but on his perseverance and nose for an interesting problem, enduring all the false twists and turns that exploring one entails.&lt;p&gt;I believe this is the general trait of who we recognize as great minds.</text></comment>
<story><title>Einstein was no lone genius</title><url>http://www.nature.com/news/history-einstein-was-no-lone-genius-1.18793</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>cubano</author><text>Einstein&amp;#x27;s big year was 1905, not 1915, and the four (five?) papers he produced during that year (one of which won him a Nobel) could easily be described as the work of a &amp;quot;lone genius.&amp;quot;&lt;p&gt;He did most of work of that year while working, of course as we all know, as a patent clerk.&lt;p&gt;Obviously, no one lives in a vacuum, and all legendary geniuses stand on the shoulders of other giants, but I can&amp;#x27;t help but think this article somewhat misrepresents the reality of Einstein&amp;#x27;s world-changing contributions.&lt;p&gt;[edits]</text></comment>