Albert Einstein, reputable sources?

[tobben]

Hello forum. I am in the process of making a small writeup on Albert Einstein,

how he has influenced society/science, both at the time of living and today.

It's a general writeup, so i won't go very deep in the details, it's more of a

overview.

 

But i have a small issue .. i am running into alot of conflicting information

as to when he was doing what, his education etc.. Does anyone have some

pretty solid, reputable sources? i only have until tomorrow, so i can't exactly

refer to books as source material.

[terrytek]

Wikipedia?

[tobben]

Wikipedia?

that is the least reputable source i can think of

That is one of the places i am running into conflicting information.

If anything i don't have time to evaluate wikipedia articles.

 

Thanks for the suggestion though.

[terrytek]

that is the least reputable source i can think of

That is one of the places i am running into conflicting information.

If anything i don't have time to evaluate wikipedia articles.

 

Thanks for the suggestion though.

Actually, it's getting more reputable now.

[Lingrah]

that is the least reputable source i can think of

That is one of the places i am running into conflicting information.

If anything i don't have time to evaluate wikipedia articles.

 

Thanks for the suggestion though.

They are hiring employees to make it more reputable. 

[tobben]

Actually, it's getting more reputable now.

Wikipedia is actually pretty good, but it still has very questionable 

characteristics like anyone being able to edit anything at a whim..

and wikipedia is usually a secondary source, it is backed by a mess

of numerous other sources that i cannot filter through now.

 

And it's still not something i can confidently refer to. Especially not

without atleast 2-3 other sources that agree with wikipedia.

Right now i am looking for something hopefully abit more "official"

 

They are hiring employees to make it more reputable. 

It's still not something i can use seriously in this context.

[Volbet]

The Nobel Prize website got some information: http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1921/einstein-bio.html

There are also a bunch of biographies about Einstein, but I have run into conflicting information in those aswell.

 

The problem with Einstein is that he has become more myth than man in some areas.

[terrytek]

Wikipedia is actually pretty good, but it still has very questionable 

characteristics like anyone being able to edit anything at a whim..

 

And it's still not something i can confidently refer to. Especially not

without atleast 2-3 other sources that agree with wikipedia.

Right now i am looking for something hopefully abit more "official"

 

It's still not something i can use seriously in this context.

Some of them are locked, and if you're not happy with the data, there are always links towards the bottom of each page.

[tobben]

Some of them are locked, and if you're not happy with the data, there are always links towards the bottom of each page.

usually just official(sometimes) or very sensitive articles.

and i edited my message before you replied,

refer to the last part of first paragraph .

 

Either way, wikipedia is not an option.

I might use it on the side to further strengthen

some claims, if i can. But not as primary source.

[terrytek]

usually just official(sometimes) or very sensitive articles.

and i edited my message before you replied,

refer to the last part of first paragraph .

 

Either way, wikipedia is not an option.

I might use it on the side to further strengthen

some claims, if i can. But not as primary source.

OK. I'm out of ideas though.

[Tacitus]

Actually, it's getting more reputable now.

 

It's totally unacceptable as an academic source.

 

http://universitypublishingonline.org/cambridge/companions/ebook.jsf?bid=CCO9781139024525

 

Are any of these chapters relevant to you? The introduction might be. If so I can help you getting access to chapters in PDF form.

[tobben]

It's totally unacceptable as an academic source.

 

http://universitypublishingonline.org/cambridge/companions/ebook.jsf?bid=CCO9781139024525

 

Are any of these chapters relevant to you? The introduction might be. If so I can help you getting access to chapters in PDF form.

That would be awesome , 1, 7, 10, 11,  14 could potentially be relevant, possibly 2.

or just the introduction if they are too long for me to get anything relevant out of them

in a few hours.

 

Edit: from what i can tell from the chapter description it looks like the introduction

would be very helpful, now i just have to pray that you come back online *fingers crossed*

 

just how long and in-depth are these chapters? it might be something i would

be interested in buying. That is if i can comprehend the majority of it without

a degree in physics, which i suspect might not be the case.

[TetraSky]

Wikipedia... and then look at the Sources for the article at the bottom. That's your "reputable" sources.

[Tacitus]

That would be awesome , 1, 7, 10, 11,  14 could potentially be relevant, possibly 2.

or just the introduction if they are too long for me to get anything relevant out of them

in a few hours.

 

Edit: from what i can tell from the chapter description it looks like the introduction

would be very helpful, now i just have to pray that you come back online *fingers crossed*

 

just how long and in-depth are these chapters? it might be something i would

be interested in buying. That is if i can comprehend the majority of it without

a degree in physics, which i suspect might not be the case.

 

In  a few hours you'll not get a lot out of more than one chapter unless you're a fast reader. The intro might be good though. Cambridge companions are really good, up to date books collaborated on by leading academics. It might be more historical than scientific, however.

 

I'll quickly get you the intro and try PM you it.