Original taken from matveychev_oleg in Europe, which is better not to know Western...
Niels Bohr, discussing the theory of elementary particles, said: “There is no doubt that we are facing an insane
I am a theory. The question is whether it's crazy enough to be right." These words can also be attributed to Albert Einstein’s theory of relativity. In science there was no other such “crazy”, radical and abrupt transition to a new picture of the world as the transition from Newton’s ideas to Einstein’s ideas was, although Einstein only continued, generalized and completed the work begun by Newton.
While developing the theory of relativity, Einstein considered the behavior of a physical body under conditions that give it a speed comparable to the speed of light.
How does the body behave under such conditions? It obeys neither the laws of Euclidean geometry, which were considered unchanged for more than 2000 years, nor the laws discovered by Newton in the 17th century. Einstein deduced a formula that shocked the entire physical world about the proportionality between energy, mass of a body and the speed of its movement; this formula became the starting point for the most significant practical conclusions from the theory of relativity.
Despite the paradoxical nature of these facts, Einstein concluded that the behavior of the body in such extreme conditions, in the so-called non-Euclidean world, is explained by the most general properties of space and time and finds a place in world harmony.
How could the writer Dostoevsky influence the scientist’s scientific work (and perhaps even the development of the theory of relativity)? Einstein claimed that he gave him “more than any scientific thinker, more than Gauss,” and yet Gauss was a great mathematician and physicist, whose works and formulas were included in many textbooks and are still studied today.
Maybe Einstein was struck by how the writer explores the actions and thoughts of a person in an extreme situation? After all, Dostoevsky puts his heroes in incredibly difficult situations (especially in novels), and then aspects of their character are revealed that under ordinary conditions cannot be detected.
It is impossible to predict the turn of events, the next remark or action of someone's tossing sick soul. But when the deed is committed, the remark is thrown, the events are determined, it seems that the deed, the remark, and the events are what they could only be.
An almost physically palpable tension - intellectual and emotional - is caused when reading by the complete authenticity of the most paradoxical turns in Dostoevsky. This feature of his was consonant with the paradoxical nature of existence itself, the authenticity of an unthinkable paradox, which are so vividly presented in the works of Einstein.
Dostoevsky, apparently, turned out to be close to Einstein also in the harmony of the narrative, in that his world, in which the most unexpected turns acquire some kind of logical justification, was “non-Euclidean.”
In the novel The Brothers Karamazov, which Dostoevsky began writing in 1879 (the year Einstein was born), Ivan Karamazov says to Alyosha: “If God exists and if He really created the earth, then, as we completely know, He created it according to Euclidean geometry, and the human mind has the concept of only three dimensions of space.
Meanwhile, there were and are even now geometers and philosophers, and even the most remarkable ones, who doubt that the entire universe, or, even more extensively, all of existence, was created only according to Euclidean geometry, even dare to dream that two parallel lines, which according to There is no way they can meet Euclid on earth; perhaps they would meet somewhere in infinity.”.
Einstein belonged to just such people. His theory of relativity considers physical processes in four-dimensional non-Euclidean space, where all parallel lines converge and where physical bodies obey the harmonious general laws of the Universe.
Ivan Karamazov also sees a certain universal harmony in “non-Euclidean existence”. He says: “I am convinced, like a baby, that suffering will heal and smooth out, that all the offensive comedy of human contradictions will disappear, like a pathetic mirage, like a vile invention of the weak and small, like an atom, human Euclidean mind, that, finally, in the broad finale, at the moment of eternal harmony, something so precious will happen and appear that it will be enough for all hearts, to satisfy all indignations, to atone for all the atrocities of people, for all the shed blood.” It would seem how beautiful the world drawn by Ivan is.
Here it is, happiness! What an ideal! But Ivan Karamazov does not accept this world harmony: “Even if parallel lines come together, I will see it myself: I will see it and say that they have come together, but still I will not accept it.” It’s amazing: Dostoevsky seemed to have foreseen the creation of the theory of relativity and its rejection not only by people like Ivan Karamazov, but also by many scientists and politicians; he foresaw the persecution because of which Einstein was forced to leave Germany forever...
But the main thing was still not the rapprochement of Dostoevsky’s “non-Euclidean world” with the non-Euclidean world of the general theory of relativity - Dostoevsky gave Einstein not logical, but psychological impulses. For a scientist, when he creates a “crazy” theory, it is important that habitual associations and ideas are shaken by a powerful psychological influence that can stimulate the emergence of new associations.
Dostoevsky had such an influence on Einstein, and it turned out to be especially strong, perhaps because the writer’s work is imbued with a paradoxical “non-Euclidean” harmony. Apparently, this is why Einstein said: “Dostoevsky gives me more than any scientific thinker, more than Gauss!”
Niels Bohr, discussing the theory of elementary particles, said: “There is no doubt that this is a crazy theory. The question is whether it's crazy enough to be right." These words can also be attributed to Albert Einstein’s theory of relativity. In science there was no other such “crazy”, radical and abrupt transition to a new picture of the world as the transition from Newton’s ideas to Einstein’s ideas was, although Einstein only continued, generalized and completed the work begun by Newton.
While developing the theory of relativity, Einstein considered the behavior of a physical body under conditions that give it a speed comparable to the speed of light. How does the body behave under such conditions? It obeys neither the laws of Euclidean geometry, which were considered unchanged for more than 2000 years, nor the laws discovered by Newton in the 17th century. Einstein deduced a formula that shocked the entire physical world about the proportionality between energy, mass of a body and the speed of its movement; this formula became the starting point for the most significant practical conclusions from the theory of relativity. Despite the paradoxical nature of these facts, Einstein concluded that the behavior of the body in such extreme conditions, in the so-called non-Euclidean world, is explained by the most general properties of space and time and finds a place in world harmony.
How could the writer Dostoevsky influence the scientist’s scientific work (and perhaps even the development of the theory of relativity)? Einstein claimed that he gave him “more than any scientific thinker, more than Gauss,” and yet Gauss was a great mathematician and physicist, whose works and formulas were included in many textbooks and are still studied today.
Maybe Einstein was struck by how the writer explores the actions and thoughts of a person in an extreme situation? After all, Dostoevsky puts his heroes in incredibly difficult situations (especially in novels), and then aspects of their character are revealed that under ordinary conditions cannot be detected. It is impossible to predict the turn of events, the next remark or action of someone's tossing sick soul. But when the deed is committed, the remark is thrown, the events are determined, it seems that the deed, the remark, and the events are what they could only be. An almost physically palpable tension - intellectual and emotional - is caused when reading by the complete authenticity of the most paradoxical turns in Dostoevsky. This feature of his was consonant with the paradoxical nature of existence itself, the authenticity of an unthinkable paradox, which are so vividly presented in the works of Einstein.
Dostoevsky, apparently, turned out to be close to Einstein also in the harmony of the narrative, in that his world, in which the most unexpected turns acquire some kind of logical justification, was “non-Euclidean.”
In the novel The Brothers Karamazov, which Dostoevsky began writing in 1879 (the year Einstein was born), Ivan Karamazov tells Alyosha: “If there is a God and if He really created the earth, then, as we absolutely know, He created it according to Euclidean geometry, and the human mind with the concept of only three dimensions of space. Meanwhile, there were and are even now geometers and philosophers, and even the most remarkable ones, who doubt that the entire universe or, even more extensively, all existence was created only according to Euclidean geometry, even dare to dream that two parallel lines, which according to There is no way that Euclid could meet on earth; perhaps they would meet somewhere in infinity.” Einstein belonged to just such people. His theory of relativity considers physical processes in four-dimensional non-Euclidean space, where all parallel lines converge and where physical bodies obey the harmonious general laws of the Universe.
Ivan Karamazov also sees a certain universal harmony in “non-Euclidean existence”. He says: “I am convinced, like a baby, that suffering will heal and smooth out, that all the offensive comedy of human contradictions will disappear, like a pathetic mirage, like a vile invention of the weak and small, like an atom, human Euclidean mind, that, finally, in the broad finale, at the moment of eternal harmony, something so precious will happen and appear that it will be enough for all hearts, to satisfy all indignations, to atone for all the atrocities of people, for all the shed blood.” It would seem how beautiful the world drawn by Ivan is. Here it is, happiness! What an ideal! But Ivan Karamazov does not accept this world harmony: “Even if parallel lines come together, I will see it myself: I will see it and say that they have come together, but still I will not accept it.” It’s amazing: Dostoevsky seemed to have foreseen the creation of the theory of relativity and its rejection not only by people like Ivan Karamazov, but also by many scientists and politicians; he foresaw the persecution because of which Einstein was forced to leave Germany forever...
But the main thing was still not the rapprochement of Dostoevsky’s “non-Euclidean world” with the non-Euclidean world of the general theory of relativity - Dostoevsky gave Einstein not logical, but psychological impulses. For a scientist, when he creates a “crazy” theory, it is important that habitual associations and ideas are shaken by a powerful psychological influence that can stimulate the emergence of new associations. Dostoevsky had such an influence on Einstein, and it turned out to be especially strong, perhaps because the writer’s work is imbued with a paradoxical “non-Euclidean” harmony. Apparently, this is why Einstein said: “Dostoevsky gives me more than any scientific thinker, more than Gauss!”
for the magazine "Man Without Borders"
Niels Bohr, discussing the theory of elementary particles, said: “There is no doubt that this is a crazy theory. The question is whether it's crazy enough to be right." These words can also be attributed to Albert Einstein’s theory of relativity. In science there was no other such “crazy”, radical and abrupt transition to a new picture of the world as the transition from Newton’s ideas to Einstein’s ideas was, although Einstein only continued, generalized and completed the work begun by Newton.
While developing the theory of relativity, Einstein considered the behavior of a physical body under conditions that give it a speed comparable to the speed of light. How does the body behave under such conditions? It obeys neither the laws of Euclidean geometry, which were considered unchanged for more than 2000 years, nor the laws discovered by Newton in the 17th century. Einstein deduced a formula that shocked the entire physical world about the proportionality between energy, mass of a body and the speed of its movement; this formula became the starting point for the most significant practical conclusions from the theory of relativity. Despite the paradoxical nature of these facts, Einstein concluded that the behavior of the body in such extreme conditions, in the so-called non-Euclidean world, is explained by the most general properties of space and time and finds a place in world harmony.
How could the writer Dostoevsky influence the scientist’s scientific work (and perhaps even the development of the theory of relativity)? Einstein claimed that he gave him “more than any scientific thinker, more than Gauss,” and yet Gauss was a great mathematician and physicist, whose works and formulas were included in many textbooks and are still studied today.
Maybe Einstein was struck by how the writer explores the actions and thoughts of a person in an extreme situation? After all, Dostoevsky puts his heroes in incredibly difficult situations (especially in novels), and then aspects of their character are revealed that under ordinary conditions cannot be detected. It is impossible to predict the turn of events, the next remark or action of someone's tossing sick soul. But when the deed is committed, the remark is thrown, the events are determined, it seems that the deed, the remark, and the events are what they could only be. An almost physically palpable tension - intellectual and emotional - is caused when reading by the complete authenticity of the most paradoxical turns in Dostoevsky. This feature of his was consonant with the paradoxical nature of existence itself, the authenticity of an unthinkable paradox, which are so vividly presented in the works of Einstein.
Dostoevsky, apparently, turned out to be close to Einstein also in the harmony of the narrative, in that his world, in which the most unexpected turns acquire some kind of logical justification, was “non-Euclidean.”
In the novel The Brothers Karamazov, which Dostoevsky began writing in 1879 (the year Einstein was born), Ivan Karamazov tells Alyosha: “If there is a God and if He really created the earth, then, as we absolutely know, He created it according to Euclidean geometry, and the human mind with the concept of only three dimensions of space. Meanwhile, there were and are even now geometers and philosophers, and even the most remarkable ones, who doubt that the entire universe, or, even more extensively, all of existence, was created only according to Euclidean geometry, even dare to dream that two parallel lines, which, according to Euclid, they could never come together on earth, perhaps they would come together somewhere in infinity.” Einstein belonged to just such people. His theory of relativity considers physical processes in four-dimensional non-Euclidean space, where all parallel lines converge and where physical bodies obey the harmonious general laws of the Universe.
Ivan Karamazov also sees a certain universal harmony in “non-Euclidean existence”. He says: “I am convinced, like a baby, that suffering will heal and smooth out, that all the offensive comedy of human contradictions will disappear, like a pathetic mirage, like a vile invention of the weak and small, like an atom, human Euclidean mind, that, finally, in the broad finale, at the moment of eternal harmony, something so precious will happen and appear that it will be enough for all hearts, to satisfy all indignations, to atone for all the atrocities of people, for all the shed blood.” It would seem how beautiful the world drawn by Ivan is. Here it is, happiness! What an ideal! But Ivan Karamazov does not accept this world harmony: “Even if parallel lines come together, I will see it myself: I will see it and say that they have come together, but still I will not accept it.” It’s amazing: Dostoevsky seemed to have foreseen the creation of the theory of relativity and its rejection not only by people like Ivan Karamazov, but also by many scientists and politicians; he foresaw the persecution because of which Einstein was forced to leave Germany forever...
But the main thing was not the rapprochement of Dostoevsky’s “non-Euclidean” world with the non-Euclidean world of the general theory of relativity: Dostoevsky gave Einstein not logical, but psychological impulses. For a scientist, when he creates a “crazy” theory, it is important that habitual associations and ideas are shaken by a powerful psychological influence that can stimulate the emergence of new associations. Dostoevsky had such an influence on Einstein, and it turned out to be especially strong, perhaps because the writer’s work is imbued with a paradoxical “non-Euclidean” harmony. Apparently, this is why Einstein said: “Dostoevsky gives me more than any scientific thinker, more than Gauss!”
Niels Bohr, discussing the theory of elementary particles, said: “There is no doubt that this is a crazy theory. The question is whether it's crazy enough to be right." These words can also be attributed to Albert Einstein’s theory of relativity. In science there was no other such “crazy”, radical and abrupt transition to a new picture of the world as the transition from Newton’s ideas to Einstein’s ideas was, although Einstein only continued, generalized and completed the work begun by Newton.
While developing the theory of relativity, Einstein considered the behavior of a physical body under conditions that give it a speed comparable to the speed of light. How does the body behave under such conditions? It obeys neither the laws of Euclidean geometry, which were considered unchanged for more than 2000 years, nor the laws discovered by Newton in the 17th century. Einstein deduced a formula that shocked the entire physical world about the proportionality between energy, mass of a body and the speed of its movement; this formula became the starting point for the most significant practical conclusions from the theory of relativity. Despite the paradoxical nature of these facts, Einstein concluded that the behavior of the body in such extreme conditions, in the so-called non-Euclidean world, is explained by the most general properties of space and time and finds a place in world harmony.
How could the writer Dostoevsky influence the scientist’s scientific work (and perhaps even the development of the theory of relativity)? Einstein claimed that he gave him “more than any scientific thinker, more than Gauss,” and yet Gauss was a great mathematician and physicist, whose works and formulas were included in many textbooks and are still studied today.
Maybe Einstein was struck by how the writer explores the actions and thoughts of a person in an extreme situation? After all, Dostoevsky puts his heroes in incredibly difficult situations (especially in novels), and then aspects of their character are revealed that under ordinary conditions cannot be detected. It is impossible to predict the turn of events, the next remark or action of someone's tossing sick soul. But when the deed is committed, the remark is thrown, the events are determined, it seems that the deed, the remark, and the events are what they could only be. An almost physically palpable tension - intellectual and emotional - is caused when reading by the complete authenticity of the most paradoxical turns in Dostoevsky. This feature of his was consonant with the paradoxical nature of existence itself, the authenticity of an unthinkable paradox, which are so vividly presented in the works of Einstein.
Dostoevsky, apparently, turned out to be close to Einstein also in the harmony of the narrative, in that his world, in which the most unexpected turns acquire some kind of logical justification, was “non-Euclidean.”
In the novel The Brothers Karamazov, which Dostoevsky began writing in 1879 (the year Einstein was born), Ivan Karamazov tells Alyosha: “If there is a God and if He really created the earth, then, as we absolutely know, He created it according to Euclidean geometry, and the human mind with the concept of only three dimensions of space. Meanwhile, there were and are even now geometers and philosophers, and even the most remarkable ones, who doubt that the entire universe, or, even more extensively, all of existence, was created only according to Euclidean geometry, even dare to dream that two parallel lines, which according to There is no way that Euclid could meet on earth; perhaps they would meet somewhere in infinity.” Einstein belonged to just such people. His theory of relativity considers physical processes in four-dimensional non-Euclidean space, where all parallel lines converge and where physical bodies obey the harmonious general laws of the Universe.
Ivan Karamazov also sees a certain universal harmony in “non-Euclidean existence”. He says: “I am convinced, like a baby, that suffering will heal and smooth out, that all the offensive comedy of human contradictions will disappear, like a pathetic mirage, like a vile invention of the weak and small, like an atom, human Euclidean mind, that, finally, in the broad finale, at the moment of eternal harmony, something so precious will happen and appear that it will be enough for all hearts, to satisfy all indignations, to atone for all the atrocities of people, for all the shed blood.” It would seem how beautiful the world drawn by Ivan is. Here it is, happiness! What an ideal! But Ivan Karamazov does not accept this world harmony: “Even if parallel lines come together, I will see it myself: I will see it and say that they have come together, but still I will not accept it.” It’s amazing: Dostoevsky seemed to have foreseen the creation of the theory of relativity and its rejection not only by people like Ivan Karamazov, but also by many scientists and politicians; he foresaw the persecution because of which Einstein was forced to leave Germany forever...
But the main thing was still not the rapprochement of Dostoevsky’s “non-Euclidean world” with the non-Euclidean world of the general theory of relativity - Dostoevsky gave Einstein not logical, but psychological impulses. For a scientist, when he creates a “crazy” theory, it is important that habitual associations and ideas are shaken by a powerful psychological influence that can stimulate the emergence of new associations. Dostoevsky had such an influence on Einstein, and it turned out to be especially strong, perhaps because the writer’s work is imbued with a paradoxical “non-Euclidean” harmony. Apparently that's why Einstein said: “Dostoevsky gives me more than any scientific thinker, more than Gauss!”
Einstein was engrossed in Dostoevsky, Freud argued with him, and Nabokov hated him. Director Akira Kurosawa made Prince Myshkin Japanese - and the Japanese fell in love with the books of the great writer. It was rumored that a portrait of Dostoevsky hung in Hitler’s office, and the “chief propagandist” of the Reich, Joseph Goebbels
I read the novels of this Russian writer, just like in his homeland. Today Dostoevsky is one of the most quoted and one of the most translated Russian writers in the world.
Albert Einstein about Dostoevsky
The great scientist spoke of Dostoevsky almost more enthusiastically than many writers. It would seem that the famous physicist should have first of all named the scientists who preceded him among his idols. But Einstein said: “Dostoevsky gave me a lot, an extraordinary amount, more than Gauss.” Gauss's work helped Einstein develop the mathematical basis of the theory of relativity. Perhaps Dostoevsky's philosophy gave the physicist ideas that he used in his works.
Einstein said that works of art gave him the feeling of supreme happiness. In order to grasp this feeling, to understand the greatness of the work, he does not need to be an art critic or literary critic. He admitted: “After all, all such research will never penetrate the core of such a creation as The Brothers Karamazov.” In correspondence with physicist Paul Ehrenfest, Einstein called The Brothers Karamazov “the most piercing book” that fell into his hands.
Friedrich Nietzsche: philosopher who studied with Dostoevsky
The famous philosopher said that acquaintance with Dostoevsky’s work “belongs to the happiest discoveries” in his life. He considered Dostoevsky a genius in tune with his worldview, “the only psychologist” from whom he had something to learn.Nietzsche especially admired Notes from Underground. He wrote that when reading this book, “the instinct of kinship immediately began to speak in him.”
However, admiring Nietzsche, he testified that Dostoevsky’s “Russian pessimism” was not close to him and even called the writer a champion of “slave morality,” and many of the writer’s conclusions contradicted his “hidden instincts.”
Franz Kafka – “blood relative” of Dostoevsky
Another gloomy author who felt a “kinship” with Dostoevsky. Kafka wrote to his beloved Felicia Bauer that the Russian writer was one of four authors in the world with whom he felt a “blood relationship.” True, in the letter he tried to convince Felicia that he was not created for family life. After all, of the four writers he mentioned (Dostoevsky, Kleist, Flaubert, Grillparzer), only Dostoevsky married.
Kafka read excerpts from the novel “The Adolescent” to his friend Max Brod with delight. He noted in his memoirs that it was the fifth chapter of the novel that largely predetermined Kafka’s unique style.
The “Father of Psychoanalysis” did not limit himself to mentioning Dostoevsky. He wrote a whole work about him - “Dostoevsky and parricide.” Freud was interested not so much in the artistic merits of the Russian classic's novels as in his ideas. As a writer, Freud put Dostoevsky on a par with Shakespeare, calling The Brothers Karamazov the greatest novel written in the world. And a masterpiece within a masterpiece is “The Legend of the Grand Inquisitor” from the same novel, “one of the highest achievements of world literature.”
But as a moralist, Dostoevsky the thinker, according to Freud, is much inferior to Dostoevsky the writer. Freud emphasized that Dostoevsky could have become the “Teacher and Liberator” of people, but chose to join “their jailers.”
The outstanding Japanese director made Dostoevsky a cult favorite among the Japanese. His film “The Idiot” transfers the action of the novel to Japan - and demonstrates that the problems raised by Dostoevsky are relevant for all peoples and cultures.
Kurosawa admitted that he loved Dostoevsky since childhood because he honestly wrote about life. The writer attracted the director with his special compassion for people, participation, and kindness. Kurosawa even stated that Dostoevsky surpassed the “boundaries of the human” and that there was a “divine trait” in him. The director himself shared the writer’s views and, of all his heroes, especially singled out Myshkin. Therefore, he called the film “The Idiot” one of his most favorite creations. As Kurosawa said, making this film was not easy - Dostoevsky seemed to be standing behind him.
The director, who devoted a lot of effort to his idea, even fell ill shortly after finishing work. But he valued the film as an attempt to capture the "spirit" of Dostoevsky and bring it to Japanese audiences. Kurosawa succeeded - he had never received so many responses to any work.
Largely thanks to Kurosawa, the Japanese fell in love with the Russian classic. In 1975, the famous Japanese critic Kenichi Matsumoto wrote that the Japanese are obsessed with Dostoevsky. Now in Japan there is another “boom” of Dostoevsky: for example, in 2007, a new translation of “The Brothers Karamazov” was published and immediately became a bestseller.
Ernest Hemingway: how to respect Dostoevsky and not like his books
Perhaps the most controversial assessments of Dostoevsky belong to this writer. In the novel “A Feast That Is Always With You,” Hemingway devoted an entire episode to talking about Dostoevsky.
Hemingway, like most famous foreign figures, read novels in translation. Thus, the translator Constance Garnett instilled in America a “taste for Dostoevsky.” There was even a joke that Americans love not Russian classics, but Constance.
Hemingway’s hero, who has an autobiographical basis, admitted that even a “refined” translation does not save the style of the novels: “how can a person write so badly, so incredibly badly.” But at the same time, the idea, the spirit remain - the texts have an incredibly strong impact on the reader.
But despite the strong impact, Hemingway refused to reread Dostoevsky. He described a certain journey in which he had the book “Crime and Punishment” with him. But he preferred to study German and read newspapers rather than take on a great novel. However, The Brothers Karamazov still made it onto the list of the most important books for Hemingway.
In the life of the writer himself there was his painful love story -.
