> yeah it is and the fact you keep going back to it as if it's some sort of gotcha  it's not a "gotcha", it's just not insignificant. it is why for multiple posts you accused me of being patent-office-anon despite my telling you i wasn't. mistaking ids happens. it doesn't make a "gotcha". > the point isn't that stealing ideas is impossible moron. you specifically said that he didn't steal the idea because the two were working together. you didn't elaborate in any detail. perhaps that is one of the issues with posting with such hostility and brevity. > the point is you have no idea what you're talking about demonstrated by the fact you have no idea regarding the genesis of the theory and the relationship between hilbert and einstein. hence my question to you, which was an opportunity for you to explain something you know well to me as well as other anons, which would be a constructive means to dispel the beliefs many anons hold regarding einstein. i thought someone who got so involved in the argument with patent-office-anon would enjoy that as well as being able to actually educate others. again, i have readily admitted that i didn't know enough about it to say anything confidently. you aren't saying anything i haven't admitted to. > you got your answer. thanks, as i said previously. > spend more time learning to extrapolate and/or picking up on and exploring new tangents will do. until i die. > instead of telling strangers on the internet about your iq score it was relevant to the case of mistaken identity, and not relevant past that at all.  > they are casually connected scientists in completely different locations with no connections coming up with the same concepts, ideas, theories, etc. is not always causally connected, though you can argue it is in some cases. > protip: ... i don't "use words to try to sound smart". i think there is an aspect of synchronicity to many of these cases of simultaneous discovery.
Canada