Albert and Mileva Einstein had premarital sex and as a result, Mileva got pregnant. She had a girl, born in 1902. This was considered a big disgrace in those days in her country, and little is known about the child and her fate. The author sets to find out what happened to Lieserl. This book is easy to read, in general, although the abundant number of people interviewed makes it a bit confusing at times. Fortunately, the author did not forget to include a genealogical tree in the first few pages, to which i referred constantly.

Just a few points:

· The author stretches facts quite a bit. For example, on page 175, Einstein is supposed to have written to his ex-wife: "But the heredity of our own children is not without blemish", and the author affirms that Einstein "was ostensibly including Lieserl". Really? People speak like this all the time and are not necessarily referring to a love child. The front cover photo is another example. Zackheim says, "This may be the only existing image of Lieserl", and the blur she is referring to can also pass as a goat, a fence post or a dahlia. There are many other examples of these might-or-might-not situations, and the problem is that the author draws too many conclusions from them.

· While i was reading this book I could not help but think that her research did not differ all that much from what journalists do when writing an exposé on a modern day celebrity. They usually do not have to travel to Central Europe to do so, and do not get financial support from the NEA, but in substance they do the same job. Zackheim speculates whether Einstein and Mileva had sex after their divorce, whether Einstein's syphilis is what caused his children's ailments and all this speculation becomes slightly sordid after a while.

· When Woody Allen became tabloid fodder a few years ago, i was very disappointed. I like what he creates but do not like him as a person. Same thing with Einstein after reading this book. He was a genius who revolutionized the way we do science today, but as a human being he was a self-centered, tyrannical, arrogant, miserly,...(and you can add your own list of pejorative adjectives here). If only half of what Zackheim says is true, he was truly evil, especially to his children.

· Zackheim spent a lot of time in Serbia, and her accounts about the war and the difficulties she observed are some of the best writing in the book. However, she writes about Serbs as an American (and who can blame her? that's what she is). There is a slight condescending tone whenever she refers to Serbian culture, especially more blatant when talking about any of the male relatives of Mileva (alive and interviewed by her, or long dead).

In summary, this is a passable book about an unsolved mystery. It is entertaining, fast, provides some good information on life in Central Europe from the late 1800's to present, but when you get to the back cover it leaves you dissatisfied. Ultimately, it did not deliver.

This book was a fascinating read .... Other problems: The book bogged down in names and is hindered by a lack of an index. So when my head was swimming with names, I couldn't check the book's first mention of that person to be reminded who it was. Zackheim was repeatedly careless with pronouns, so a "she" or "her" in a sentence could refer to more than one woman.

Zackheim speculated too much, such as who knew whom, and what motivated people. She speculated on small things, such as whether Einstein and his ex-wife resumed sexual relations. She speculated on big things - such as what happened to Lieserl.

I was originally engrossed in the book. I dreamed about it one night, and the next day, I had to read the last 100 pages to find out what happened to Lieserl. Zackheim doesn't know. I felt let down.

Well-researched, well put together. Easy, pleasant reading. Nothing stunning or dramatic. On the plus side: Voyeuristic insights give reader access to the mysterious lives of Mileva and Albert. Letters and interviews bring them to life. Engaging description of the author's tracks in the mystical Voijvodina, Yugoslavia. On the minus side, two observations: (1) Regarding Lieserl, there are no new conclusions. The infant dies of scarlet fever, removing the shame and burden of an illegitimate child from Mileva, Albert, and their families. (2) Regarding Albert, the revelations about his coldness are not new. He is a man of another world, of unparalleled genius. Rating him by our human standards is impossible. Unfortunately for Mileva, she fell in love with him.

I hold a degree in physics and am currently in the process to become a priest so I read this book with great interest. I was not impressed with Powell's writing. I was put off by the numerous instances of exaggeration and projecting unknown personal motivations on historical characters. Powell's argument flowed like papers I wrote in high school and college with gross shading of facts and very little honest apprasial of opposing viewpoints. I also had a hard time accepting the cumbersome sci/religion as a real word. I hope it never catches on. There are much better texts on the thrilling topic of science and religion than God in the Equation.

That would be the cosmological constant that Einstein referred to as "the biggest mistake of my life"? Not that he in any way intended it to be considered as an intelligent agent, as the author here would seem to wish us to believe.

Personally I'd recommend reading something that isn't completely duplicitous instead, but maybe that's just my preference not to be misled, deceived or manipulated when I read a book.

It's hard to get much bigger than the themes in this
book: how did the universe begin, how will it end, and
is there any way to find spiritual satisfaction
through science? Amazingly, this writer pulls it off.
The first part of the book covers historical ideas
about the universe, bringing people like Galileo and
Newton to life as complex, passionate thinkers. The
later chapters get into modern cosmology, covering the
big bang and some of the current far-out ideas about
"dark energy" and other universes.

I recently read a much more informative book "Albert Einstein: The Incorrigible Plagiarist" by Christopher Jon Bjerknes which tells the truth about Einstein and the 1905 papers Einstein's wife Mileva Maric wrote for him. The Bjerknes book is a scholarly book, and it presents the facts. Anyone interested in the 1905 papers should know the truth. Max Born said of the 1905 relativity paper, "It gives you the impression of quite a new venture. But that is, of course, as I have tried to explain, not true." The truth is that the theory belongs to Boscovich, Lange, Voigt, Fitzgerald, Larmor, Lorentz, Palagyi, and Poincare, among many others. The 1905 paper on special relativity did not give a single reference to these men.

If you're looking for a good book to learn a bit about Einstein's theories of relativity, you'd be better served reading his "The Meaning of Relativity." "Einstein's Miraculous Year," being a compilation of translated versions of his original 1905 papers, is more suited for the seasoned physicist who already understands the material but is curious about how Einstein really did it all. In the latter case, of course, one could turn to the professional physics literature, but it's nice to have all his 1905 papers in one place. The extra commentary is a nice addition, since it provides the necessary historical context. Too bad the book doesn't include Einstein's papers on his general theory of relativity but, of course, that would fall out of the miraculous year of 1905.

I am a nonscientist, general reader, but have read many popular accounts of special relativity. I have always felt shortchanged, though, just at the point where things get most interesting. I think that is because the real physics does lie in the equations, and verbal metaphors fall short. For me, here, for the first time, I see where the science is: just beyond the metaphors. Although I do not follow all the math by any means, so it is partly like listening to a foreign language, I recognized enough of the concepts to get a glimmer: and it is stunning. Here is Einstein himself, deriving E=mc2 in paper 4; so briefly, so lucidly (although another reader from California seems to have missed it). Paper 3 on special relativity is, even to this nonscientist, dazzling.

This book I read, Albert Einstein, was a very interesting book. It showed little known facts about his life that were very interesting to know. The book told how Einstein got to be smart. It also showed his life accomplishments and famous things he did. I reccomend this book to anyone who wants to learn more about the life of Albert Einstein.

Paul Strathern is known for concise "in a nutshell" publications, such as his excellent "The Philosophers in 90 Minutes" series of books. However, "The Big Idea" doesn't live up to that legacy, and anybody with a few moments and an internet connection can find all sorts of web pages that are more elucidating than his "Big Idea" books.

While his books provide a historical viewpoint that presents pertinent background information about each subject, one is certainly better off with books such as The Elegant Universe, by Brian Greene which does everything Strathern tries to do but with much more substance (and all in just the first few chapters).

Strathern's "Big Idea" books, with their large 14-pt print are elementary\middle-school level reading; and while they would probably make great educational gifts, they don't have much value outside that age group.

Final verdict: If you're interested in physics and relativity, there read "Relativity Visualized" by Epstein or "The Elegant Universe" by Green; or better yet, spend some time browsing the net and you'll be surprised at what you can find.

This book is an excellent introduction to Einstein - if one happens to be a theoretical physicist with an IQ of 186. In other words, this book is abstruse in the extreme. The essays describing Einstein's theories depend heavily on formulas and equations. This begs the question, "so what is the book for?" Other sections of the book dealing with Einstein and the Bomb draw from Einstein's letters, which is good, but the letters really speak for themselves anyway. The section I thought might interest me, Einstein's perspective on language and thought, turned out to be a bunch of psychobabble that obviously comprises someone's ill-conceived thesis. The tone of the book, furthermore, is sickeningly sycophantic. We all recognize Einstein as a great man. What a pity that this book doesn't bring us any closer to knowing why. The picture on the cover, however, is precious. It looks like Inspector Clouseau on the trail of the dreaded Library Fine Evader. I do not recommend this book to any but scholars who've already read everything else on the subject.