Prof. Hanoch Gutfreund, the former president of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, has been plagiarizing my papers and book. To call prof. Gutfreund prolific in plagiarizing my work would be an understatement. The serious damages I sustain from this in Israel are enormous, actually it is far more damaging than I previously thought. I wrote to the president of the Hebrew University in Jerusalem but the latter has not even answered my email. Hence it seems he fails to take responsibility for damage caused by plagiarism. I am not surprised.

In the book, *The Road to Relativity: The History and Meaning of Einstein’s “The Foundation of General Relativity”* (an annotated facsimile of Einstein’s original handwritten manuscript on general relativity and explanation of Einstein’s manuscript and equations), co-authored by prof. Jürgen Renn, prof. Gutfreund writes:

Prof. Gutfreund has picked this passage with only slight changes from my **2013** paper: “George Gamow and Albert Einstein: Did Einstein say the cosmological constant was the “biggest blunder” he ever made in his life?”, *ArXiv*: 1310.1033v [physics.histph], 03 Oct, 2013.

My name is not mentioned in note 4:

Compare the above paragraph from prof. Gutfreund’s book, *The Road to Relativity: The History and Meaning of Einstein’s “The Foundation of General Relativity, *to the abstract of my paper, “George Gamow and Albert Einstein: Did Einstein say the cosmological constant was the ‘biggest blunder’ he ever made in his life”:

And compare the penultimate paragraph from prof. Gutfreund’s book, *The Road to Relativity: The History and Meaning of Einstein’s “The Foundation of General Relativity* to two paragraphs from my paper, “George Gamow and Albert Einstein: Did Einstein say the cosmological constant was the ‘biggest blunder’ he ever made in his life?”:

In 2016 I received this message from ResearchGate:

My paper gained traffic but no citations, but prof. Gutfreund, who plagiarized my paper, received the citations.

Allen I. Janis writes in his review: “The Road to Relativity: The History and Meaning of Einstein’s ‘The Foundation of General Relativity’.” *American Journal of Physics* 84, 2016: “An interesting sideline in this chapter has to do with the frequently heard story that Einstein called his introduction of the cosmological constant the biggest mistake of his life. It seems there is no evidence that Einstein ever said or wrote this, and that it is in fact an invention of George Gamow”.

It is quite obvious the Prof. Gutfreund has effectively paraphrased the passage from my paper. On November 30, 2015, Prof. Gutfreund said in his plenary lecture, “100 years of General Relativity – What are we Celebrating?” At the Berlin Conference: A Century of General Relativity:

“But you know there is this Myth that Einstein when he abandoned the cosmological constant he said this is the worst error that I made. There is no evidence for that. Probably he never said that”.

My second book, *General Relativity Conflict and Rivalries. Einstein’s Polemics with Physicists* (published on December 1, 2015) has a whole chapter dedicated to Einstein’s “biggest blunder”. This chapter is based on my 2013 *ArXiv *paper: “George Gamow and Albert Einstein: Did Einstein say the cosmological constant was the ‘biggest blunder’ he ever made in his life?”:

Hence, plagiarism of my 2013 paper on Albert Einstein and George Gamow causes damage to my second book and to my academic status.

In addition, Prof. Gutfreund writes in *The Road to Relativity: The History and Meaning of Einstein’s “The Foundation of General Relativity”*:

A circle around the origin of coordinates is a rotating disk (in his 1916 paper “The Foundation of General Relativity”, Einstein calls the disk “a circle around the origin”).

In the preceding passage prof. Gutfreund have paraphrased a passage from my **2012** paper, “From the Berlin ‘Entwurf’ Field equations to the Einstein Tensor III: March 1916”, *ArXiv*: 1201.5358v1 [physics.hist-ph], 25 January, 2012:

and from my **2014** paper, “Einstein, Schwarzschild, the Perihelion Motion of Mercury and the Rotating Disk Story”, *ArXiv*, 1411.7370v [physics.hist-ph], 26 Nov, 2014 [Equation (70) is my equation (6) and equation (71) is my equation (11)]:

Towards the end of his 1916 paper, “The Foundation of General Relativity”, Einstein demonstrates that the gravitational field changes spatial dimensions and the clock period. However, nowhere does Einstein directly relate the rotating disk story to the above derivation. I have invoked this interpretation of Einstein’s paper. Einstein writes:

On November 30, 2015, Prof. Gutfreund lifted another passage from my paper, “Einstein, Schwarzschild, the Perihelion Motion of Mercury and the Rotating Disk Story” and changed a word here and there, in his plenary lecture, “100 years of General Relativity – What are we Celebrating? at the Berlin Conference: A Century of General Relativity:

“Another thing which he could have done. So he already knew the Schwarzschild solution, because the Schwarzschild correspondence is in December. He wrote this paper [review paper, 1916] later. He submitted it only in March. So he could have used this Schwarzschild solution who showed a __simpler__ derivation of the motion of the perihelion and of the bending of light and he did not do it”.

In the abstract of my paper, “Einstein, Schwarzschild, the Perihelion Motion of Mercury and the Rotating Disk Story”, ArXiv, 1411.7370v [physics.hist-ph], 26 Nov, 2014, I wrote:

“On November 18, 1915 Einstein reported to the Prussian Academy that the perihelion motion of Mercury is explained by his new General Theory of Relativity: Einstein found approximate solutions to his November 11, 1915 field equations. Einstein’s field equations cannot be solved in the general case, but can be solved in particular situations. The first to offer such an exact solution was Karl Schwarzschild. Schwarzschild found one line element, which satisfied the conditions imposed by Einstein on the gravitational field of the sun, as well as Einstein’s field equations from the November 18, 1915 paper. On December 22, 1915 Schwarzschild told Einstein that he reworked the calculation in his November 18 1915 paper of the Mercury perihelion. Subsequently Schwarzschild sent Einstein a manuscript, in which he derived his exact solution of Einstein’s field equations. On January 13, 1916, Einstein delivered Schwarzschild’s paper before the Prussian Academy, and a month later the paper was published. In March 1916 Einstein submitted to the *Annalen der Physik* a review article on the general theory of relativity. The paper was published two months later, in May 1916. The 1916 review article was written after Schwarzschild had found the complete exact solution to Einstein’s November 18, 1915 field equations. Einstein preferred in his 1916 paper to write his November 18, 1915 approximate solution upon Schwarzschild exact solution (and coordinate singularity therein).”

He could have though picked the idea from my 2012 paper, Weinstein, Galina, “From the Berlin ‘Entwurf’ Field equations to the Einstein Tensor III: March 1916”, *ArXiv*: 1201.5358v1 [physics.hist-ph], 25 January, 2012:

Einstein’s equations in his 1916 paper, “The Foundation of General Relativity”:

In my book,* General Relativity Conflict and Rivalries. Einstein’s Polemics with Physicists* I have also developed my previous ideas from my paper, “Einstein, Schwarzschild, the Perihelion Motion of Mercury and the Rotating Disk Story”.