This commentary reveals mistakes in Weinstein's analysis of Einstein and Poincaré's contributions to special relativity.
In 2024, after thirty years of research on this subject, I published a book entitled: Poincaré, Einstein and the discovery of special relativity. An end to the controversy (Ginoux2024). In September 2025, Galina Weinstein published a review of this book entitled: Convergences and Divergences: Einstein Poincaré and Special Relativity (arXiv:2509.09361) in which she aimed "to show how Einstein's ether-free, principle-based kinematics marked out a path that, unlike its contemporaries, became the canonical form of special relativity.'' To this end, she claimed to reconstruct "in a novel way, the 1905 derivations of Einstein and Poincaré, highlighting their contrasting paths''. In her paper, she proposed a mathematical presentation of "the 1905 derivations of Poincaré and Einstein''. And then, she pretended to trace "their similarities and, more importantly, their differences.'' Unfortunately, Weinstein's review of my book contains a number of mistakes, falsehoods and misleading criticisms that I would like to point out here. To this aim, I will follow the structure of Weinstein's paper and show section by section all the erroneous historical facts she has reported.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jean‐Marc Ginoux (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: