Description

Albert Einstein, the most famous physicist in human history, a passionate violinist who played Mozart sonatas in his Princeton living room every Wednesday night, died in 1955. A decade later, four working-class kids from Liverpool who couldn’t read music and learned guitar from borrowed chord books became the biggest band in the world. And somehow, both Einstein and the Beatles ended up with the same cultural signifier: long, unconventional hair that said “I don’t care what society thinks.” 💇

On the surface, these seem like completely unrelated phenomena. Einstein’s frizzy white halo emerged in his later years as he aged and stopped caring about grooming. The Beatles’ mop-tops were a deliberate 1960s rebellion against the clean-cut conformity of the previous generation. Einstein dedicated his life to classical music, spending decades mastering the violin and studying Bach and Mozart. The Beatles revolutionized popular music while proudly admitting they couldn’t read a note of sheet music. 🎵

But there’s something fascinating about how both Einstein and the Beatles used music as a way of thinking, how both rejected societal expectations about appearance, and how both became cultural icons whose images transcended their actual work. Einstein appears on the Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band album cover, just visible above John Lennon’s shoulder—a small acknowledgment that these two forces, classical genius and rock revolution, existed in the same cultural universe even if they never actually intersected. 🌟

Einstein’s Love Affair With Music: The Violin Called Lina

Einstein wasn’t just a physicist who happened to play violin as a hobby. Music was central to his identity, his thinking process, and his understanding of the universe. According to National Geographic, Einstein rarely went anywhere without his battered violin case, and he reportedly gave each instrument the same affectionate nickname: “Lina,” short for violin. 🎻

He started violin lessons at age six, forced into it by his mother Pauline, who was an accomplished pianist. Initially, he hated it—the rote drills, the mechanical exercises, the tedious technical focus. Then at thirteen, something changed. He discovered Mozart’s violin sonatas and fell completely in love. The mathematical precision combined with emotional depth spoke to something in his brain that connected music and physics in ways he’d spend his life exploring. ⚡

In 1929, Einstein told the Saturday Evening Post, “If I were not a physicist, I would probably be a musician.” This wasn’t false modesty or casual musing. Music was that important to him. His second wife Elsa once said she fell in love with him “because he played Mozart so beautifully on the violin.” When they settled in Princeton in the 1930s, fleeing Nazi Germany, Einstein established sacred Wednesday night chamber music sessions that he would rearrange his entire schedule to attend. 🎼

The quality of his playing is debated. There’s a widely circulated story about a time when he played in a quartet with Austrian violin virtuoso Fritz Kreisler. When they got out of sync, Kreisler turned to Einstein and said, “What’s the matter, professor? Can’t you count?” The joke works because Einstein literally invented theories about space-time but apparently couldn’t keep time in a Mozart quartet. 😅

What’s interesting is what Einstein valued in music. He loved Mozart above all others, describing the music as if it were “plucked from the universe rather than composed.” He adored Bach, once saying “listen, play, love, revere—and keep your mouth shut” about Bach’s work. He enjoyed Schubert and Haydn. But he hated Wagner (”downright repugnant”), found Brahms mostly unpersuasive, and disliked all the modernists like Schoenberg and Hindemith. 🎹

Einstein valued purity, mathematical structure, emotional restraint. He wanted music that reflected universal principles, not excessive Romantic emotionalism or modernist chaos. His musical taste was conservative, classical, grounded in the Enlightenment values of reason and proportion. And he took it deadly seriously—this wasn’t background music or relaxation, this was how he thought about the structure of reality. 🌌

The Beatles: Four Kids Who Couldn’t Read Music and Changed Everything

John Lennon, Paul McCartney, George Harrison, and Ringo Starr were not classically trained musicians. They didn’t study at conservatories. They didn’t take formal lessons in music theory. They learned by listening to American rock and roll records—Chuck Berry, Little Richard, Buddy Holly—and figuring out how to replicate the sounds. Paul could play piano by ear. John strummed guitar with reckless enthusiasm. George taught himself lead guitar techniques from records. Ringo developed his distinctive drumming style through instinct rather than instruction. 🥁

This wasn’t unusual for rock musicians of their era. What was unusual was how far they pushed it. By the mid-to-late 1960s, the Beatles were creating extraordinarily sophisticated music—complex harmonies, unusual time signatures, innovative studio techniques, classical instrumentation, experimental structures—all without being able to write it down in traditional notation. They worked entirely by ear, by feel, by experimentation. 🎼

George Martin, their classically trained producer, would often translate their ideas into formal musical language for orchestral musicians. The Beatles would sing what they wanted the strings to do, and Martin would write the actual notes. They’d describe sounds they imagined, and Martin would figure out how to achieve them. It was a collaboration between intuitive musical genius and formal training. ⚡

Their relationship with classical music was complicated. Paul was the most interested, attending classical concerts and incorporating classical elements into Beatles arrangements. “Yesterday” features a string quartet. “Eleanor Rigby” is built around strings with no guitars at all. Paul later composed classical pieces and an oratorio. But he learned classical music by listening and absorbing, not through formal study. 🎻

The irony is that by the late 1960s, the Beatles were doing things musically that were as sophisticated as anything in classical composition—time signature changes in “Here Comes the Sun,” the complex structure of “Happiness is a Warm Gun,” the orchestral chaos of “A Day in the Life”—but they couldn’t have written any of it down using traditional notation. They were innovators working outside the system, proving that formal training wasn’t necessary for musical genius. 💫

This drove some classical musicians crazy. How could these untrained kids create such sophisticated music? How could they revolutionize an art form without understanding its fundamental language? But that was exactly the point—they weren’t constrained by tradition or theory. They just followed what sounded good. 🌟

This essay continues below. Click on the title of this product to view on Amazon. As an Amazon Associate, I earn from qualifying purchases.

The Best of the Beatles

The Hair: A Tale of Two Rebellions Separated by Decades

Both Einstein and the Beatles had long, unconventional hair that became iconic. But the reasons and meanings were completely different. 💇

There’s speculation that Einstein had a rare genetic condition called “uncombable hair syndrome,” which causes hair to be dry, frizzy, and resistant to combing. But most historians think it was simpler than that: Einstein just stopped caring about grooming. He is quoted as saying “Long hair minimizes the need for barbers.” Why spend time and money on haircuts when you could be thinking about physics or playing violin? 🤷

Einstein’s messy hair was about prioritizing what mattered to him. He famously didn’t wear socks because he thought they were unnecessary. He wore the same style of simple clothing to avoid wasting mental energy on fashion decisions. His wild hair was consistent with his general philosophy of rejecting societal conventions that didn’t serve a practical purpose. It wasn’t a statement—it was indifference. 🧦

The Beatles’ long hair, by contrast, was absolutely a statement. When they started growing their hair longer in the mid-1960s, it was scandalous. Parents were horrified. Conservative commentators called them degenerates. Schools banned boys with “Beatle haircuts.” The hair was rebellion, a visible rejection of the clean-cut, conservative values of the older generation. 😱

So Einstein and the Beatles both ended up with long, unconventional hair, but for opposite reasons. Einstein’s hair said “I’m too busy thinking about important things to care about grooming.” The Beatles’ hair said “we actively reject your grooming standards as a form of social control.” One was passive indifference, the other was active rebellion. 🎯

The Sgt. Pepper Connection: When Einstein Met the Beatles (Sort Of)

There is exactly one place where Einstein and the Beatles occupy the same space: the cover of Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band, where he appears as one of dozens of cultural figures the Beatles chose to represent their influences and heroes. 🎨

The Sgt. Pepper cover was designed by Peter Blake and Jann Haworth, with the Beatles selecting figures they admired or found interesting. Einstein made the cut alongside Carl Jung, Oscar Wilde, Marlon Brando, Marilyn Monroe, Bob Dylan, and scores of others. It’s a who’s-who of 20th century culture, with Einstein representing scientific genius among the artists, writers, and actors. 🌟

The album came out in 1967, twelve years after Einstein’s death. He never heard Beatles music. The Beatles never met him. They included him because Einstein represented something about genius, about changing how we see reality, about thinking differently. In that sense, they recognized a kinship—both Einstein and the Beatles forced people to see the world in new ways, whether through physics or music. 💭

There’s also a 1967 science fiction novel by Samuel R. Delany called “The Einstein Intersection” that treats both Einstein’s theories and the Beatles as mythology. In Delany’s far-future world, the Beatles have become legendary figures like Orpheus, their story retold and reinterpreted. It’s a weird piece of evidence that by the late 1960s, Einstein and the Beatles occupied similar cultural space as symbols of transformative genius. 📚

But while Einstein was conservative in his musical taste, the Beatles kept pushing boundaries. They incorporated Indian music, electronic effects, orchestral instruments, tape loops, backwards recording—anything that sounded interesting. They didn’t respect classical tradition because they didn’t know enough about it to respect it. Their ignorance was freedom. 💫

Does technical mastery help or hinder revolutionary thinking? Einstein’s formal training in physics gave him the foundation to recognize what needed changing. The Beatles’ lack of formal training in music theory freed them from assumptions about what was possible. Maybe you need both—enough knowledge to understand the system, but not so much that you can’t imagine alternatives. 🤔

The Music of Physics and the Physics of Music

Both Einstein and the Beatles understood that music and their primary work were connected, even if they couldn’t quite articulate how. 🎵

Einstein frequently said that musical thinking helped his physics. The theory of relativity came to him in visual thought experiments, yes, but also in moments of musical contemplation. According to K&M Music School, “The theory of relativity emerged during Einstein’s most active musical period. He often said that relativity theory came to him while playing violin.” The rhythmic, structured practice of music helped organize his thoughts about space and time. 🎻

The Beatles didn’t talk about their music in physical terms, but they were constantly experimenting with how sound works—tape speeds, backwards recording, doubling tracks, layering instruments. They were intuitive physicists of sound, manipulating the actual physics of audio recording even if they couldn’t explain it scientifically. George Harrison bringing the Moog synthesizer to Abbey Road was a kind of physics experiment in how electronic oscillations could create music. ⚡

Both trusted their intuition about underlying structure. Einstein’s physics was driven by aesthetic judgment—theories should be elegant, beautiful, economical. The Beatles’ music was driven by sonic judgment—songs should feel right, sound surprising, create emotional resonance. Neither could fully explain why they made the choices they made, but both were right more often than not. 🎯