▁( 1 9 0 8 ) ▁he ▁mentioned ▁Vo igt , ▁Lor ent z ▁and ▁Ein stein . ▁M ink owski ▁himself ▁considered ▁Ein stein ' s ▁theory ▁as ▁a ▁general ization ▁of ▁Lor ent z ' s ▁and ▁cred ited ▁Ein stein ▁for ▁completely ▁stating ▁the ▁relativ ity ▁of ▁time , ▁but ▁he ▁critic ized ▁his ▁prede cess ors ▁for ▁not ▁fully ▁developing ▁the ▁relativ ity ▁of ▁space . ▁However , ▁modern ▁histor ians ▁of ▁science ▁argue ▁that ▁M ink owski ' s ▁claim ▁for ▁priority ▁was ▁un just ified , ▁because ▁M ink owski ▁( like ▁Wien ▁or ▁Abraham ) ▁ad her ed ▁to ▁the ▁elect romagnet ic ▁world - picture ▁and ▁apparently ▁didn ' t ▁fully ▁understand ▁the ▁difference ▁between ▁Lor ent z ' s ▁electron ▁theory ▁and ▁Ein stein ' s ▁kin emat ics . ▁In ▁ 1 9 0 8 , ▁Ein stein ▁and ▁La ub ▁rejected ▁the ▁four - dimensional ▁elect rod ynam ics ▁of ▁M ink owski ▁as ▁over ly ▁complicated ▁" lear ned ▁super fl uous ness " ▁and ▁published ▁a ▁" more ▁elementary ", ▁non - four - dimensional ▁deriv ation ▁of ▁the ▁basic - equ ations ▁for ▁moving ▁bodies . ▁But ▁it ▁was ▁M ink owski ' s ▁geometric ▁model ▁that ▁( a ) ▁showed ▁that ▁the ▁special ▁relativ ity ▁is ▁a ▁complete ▁and ▁internally ▁self - cons istent ▁theory , ▁( b ) ▁added ▁the ▁Lor ent z ▁invariant ▁proper ▁time ▁interval ▁( which ▁accounts ▁for ▁the ▁actual ▁read ings ▁shown ▁by