A friend of mine -- a very well-credentialed historian of science--thinks that the Isaacson bio gets Einstein very, very wrong. I've seen his review (as-yet-unpublished, I believe) and talked to him about it, and I suspect that he's right. So take its claims with a big grain of salt.
 

Hi Dr. Dan,

Thanks! - I had not heard that so I will now read the book with a more skeptical eye and take a hard look at Isaacson's sources.

I'll also bounce Isaacson's major arguments off of Shane Deichman and Von as well once I'm finished and see if they conflict with the perspective on Einstein they were taught in their physics programs.

Dan of tdaxp really enjoyed having coffee with you BTW - if I had been able to get into town earlier in the day instead of many hours later I'd have strolled over to Georgetown too.
 

Mark,

I'm looking forward to seeing Isaacson's arguments. The Einstein we were taught was an optimistic skeptic who used simple analogies to describe his questions (e.g., "What would a ray of light look like if I could travel at the speed of light?" or "Is gravitational acceleration the same as the acceleration in a rocket ship?"). Those simple questions laid the foundation for the Special and General Theories of Relativity.

sf/ shane