In Einstein and Our World, David C. Cassidy explores the relationship between Albert Einstein’s work and history, arguing that historians cannot understand the significance of a scientist’s work without context. He writes, “The history of science has achieved a greater sophistication and depth as well as a new professional status as a legitimate branch of historical research. Adapting historical methods to its subject, the new profession treats science like all other human endeavors, as a cultural phenomenon, and scientists like other historical figures, as human players in a fascinating historical drama” (pg. 17). With this model in mind, Cassidy alternates between biography, scientific explanations, and an examination of scientific work predating, concurrent with, and following Einstein. Cassidy compares the significance of Einstein’s work to that of Isaac Newton, writing, “Unlike the faith in human reason displayed by some of their Enlightenment counterparts, many twentieth-century thinkers and cultural figures saw in Einstein’s work confirmation of a world moving into an uncertain and meaningless future, and this was reflected in their own works” (pg. 15).
Examining Einstein’s thought process, Cassidy writes, “Einstein, the researcher, started with an attempt to find a Newtonian mechanical foundation for all of physics, but by 1905 he realized that a new foundation would be required” (pg. 31). He addresses the historiography of Einstein and those in his life, writing, “One historical question that has arisen recently concerns the extent to which Einstein’s famous works of 1905 derived from discussions with his friends and, especially, with his fellow physics student and future wife, Mileva Marić” (pg. 42). Cassidy concludes that Marić was crucial to Einstein’s 1905 work, despite not receiving credit in her own time. Of that work, Cassidy writes, “Einstein’s work transformed the nature and subject matter of physics, especially theoretical physics, into their influential, contemporary forms. But the effects of his work were felt only gradually, occurring in some cases over decades” (pg. 57). To summarize the impact on other scientists, Cassidy writes, “The enormous difficulty that [Max] Planck (and others) experienced in comprehending what Einstein had actually done indicates the enormous transformation in thinking that the theory of relativity required” (pg. 60).
Einstein’s discoveries transformed other scientists’ work, as well as elements of society at large. Examining how Einstein and physicists reacted to the quantum models that developed in response to relativity, Cassidy writes, “Older physicists such as Einstein and Planck, still loyal to worldviews and conceptual approaches, could not accept the new quantum physics, despite its internal logic and its mathematical coherence” (pg. 67). Quantum physics gave way to quantum mechanics. Cassidy writes, “By 1928 the two formulations – matrix mechanics and wave mechanics – had been joined into one theory, a new ‘quantum mechanics’ to replace the old Newtonian mechanics when dealing with phenomena on the atomic scale” (pg. 87). In society, people adapted relativity to describe social models, much like they had Darwin’s work. Cassidy writes, “At the close of the Great War, the familiar features of the mechanical worldview seemed suddenly undercut by relativity theory, and the old view’s ‘deterministic’ elements seemed at fault for current uncontrollable difficulties” (pg. 98). Furthermore, “Romantics did not miss the opportunity to associate Einstein’s relativity theory with ontological relativism – the assertion that all forms of ultimate knowledge, including their own preferences for mystical and religious knowledge, are equally valid accounts of the physical world” (pg. 99). Philosophers also drew upon the work. Chief among them were the Vienna Circle. Cassidy describes their work, “With relativity theory as a model, the Circle’s first order of business was to clean up the ambiguous language of science by carefully clarifying the meaning of all concepts” (pg. 115). Furthermore, “The Vienna Circle held that the only statements that are meaningful in science – that is, the only ones that will contribute to positive knowledge – are those that can be verified by direct experimental evidence” (pg. 115). While Einstein changed physics, his work reflected the concerns of his time and shaped those that followed him. ( )