Version history

{
  "name": "Albert Einstein",
  "slug": "einstein",
  "tradition": "thought experiment, principle physics",
  "description": "Einstein argued from physical principles — the equivalence\nprinciple, the invariance of c, general covariance — and\nfrom thought experiments that pushed those principles to\ntheir breaking points. The 1905 papers, general\nrelativity, EPR — each starts from a small set of\nprinciples and follows the logic to a counterintuitive\nobservable prediction. An Einsteinian argument prefers a\nprinciple one can write on a postcard to an effective\ntheory with many free parameters. Methodologically he\nprivileges thought experiments, the search for invariants,\nand the clean falsifiable prediction (light bending at\nthe 1919 eclipse, gravitational waves a century later).\nAn Einstein-claimant in a debate will press: what is the\nprinciple, what is the postcard-sized statement, and\nwhat is the riskiest observable that would falsify it?\nHis characteristic move is to refuse the patchwork\nexplanation and demand the underlying invariance.\nWeakness: the principle-physics style aged poorly on\nquantum mechanics (\"God does not play dice\") and on\nlate-career unified-field attempts.\n",
  "domain_affinities": [
    "physics",
    "methodology",
    "philosophy_of_science"
  ],
  "canonical_methods": [
    "thought_experiment",
    "principle_invariance",
    "falsifiable_prediction"
  ],
  "era": "1879-1955",
  "state": "active",
  "reputation": 0,
  "times_claimed": 0,
  "proposer_id": "system-senate"
}